[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Basant Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:15947) on 7 April, 2026
Author: Anand Sharma
Bench: Anand Sharma
[2026:RJ-JD:15947]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14624/2025
Basant Kumar S/o Shri Moti Lal Ji, Aged About 54 Years,
Resident Of Village Gulabganj, Tehsil Reodar, District - Sirohi. At
Posted Govt. Se. Sec. School Posintra, Tehsil Reodar, District-
Sirohi.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To Govt.
Department Of Education Govt. Of Raj. Secretariat, Jaipur
(Raj.).
2. Director, Secondary Education Department, Bikaner.
3. Director, Elementary Education Department, Bikaner.
4. The District Education Officer, (Secondary Education),
Sirohi.
5. The District Education Officer, (Elementary Education),
Sirohi.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahipal Singh Deora, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N. K. Mehta, Dy. GC with
Mr. Bhupesh Charan, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA
Judgment
07/04/2026
1. Aggrieved by order dated 14.06.2024 issued by District
Education Officer (Headquarter), Secondary Education, Sirohi,
whereby representation filed by the petitioner in compliance of
order dated 28.11.2023 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
has been dismissed and benefit of salary of the summer vacation
has been denied to the petitioner, he has filed the present writ
petition and has also prayed for consequential benefits.
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:15947] (2 of 7) [CW-14624/2025]
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that the petitioner was initially appointed after following due
process of recruitment in accordance with Rajasthan Education
Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 (for short 'the Rules of 1971')
vide order dated 28.02.1997 on temporary basis. However, in
quite arbitrary manner, the petitioner was not granted salary for
the summer vacation of the year 1997 allegedly on the ground
that as per Note 1 of Rule 97 of Rajasthan Service Rules, decision
has been taken by the State Government not to grant salary to
the persons, who were appointed on temporary basis after 31 st of
December in a particular year.
3. Learned counsel submits that earlier also, petitioner
filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17154/2023 before this Court,
which was disposed of vide order dated 28.11.2023 in presence of
counsel for the respondents, wherein the petitioner relied upon
the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Yogesh Kumar Pareek Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.3534/2009 decided on 20.01.2014),
and while disposing of earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner,
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court directed the petitioner to
submit a representation before the Competent Authority with
further directions to the Authority to consider and decide the
representation by a reasoned and speaking order.
4. It is further submitted that in compliance of order dated
28.11.2023, the petitioner submitted representation before the
District Education Officer (Headquarter), Secondary Education,
Sirohi, however, the same has been dismissed by a cryptic order
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:15947] (3 of 7) [CW-14624/2025]
dated 14.06.2024 without assigning any rational and cogent
reasons.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the
order dated 14.06.2024, submitted that the order passed by the
respondents is contrary to the decision given by the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in the case of Yogesh Kumar Pareek
(supra), where the issue has already been decided and similarly
situated persons were held entitled for salary of summer vacation
irrespective of the fact that they were also appointed on
temporary basis.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
there cannot be any rational object in discriminating the persons
appointed prior to 31st of December or subsequent thereto.
Moreso, when date of appointment has got no co-relation with the
salary admissible for summer vacation, particularly when the
petitioner was appointed strictly in accordance with the
recruitment process undertaken under the Rules of 1971. Denying
such benefits to the petitioner is quite discriminatory, for the
reasons that in the light of judgment of Yogesh Kumar Pareek
(supra) as well as in respect of other similar decisions, the
respondents have already granted such benefits to similarly
situated persons.
7. Learned Deputy Government Counsel vehemently
opposed the writ petition by raising an objection of maintainability
of writ petition by stating that the petitioner was initially
appointed in the year 1997 and is claiming salary of summer
vacation of the year 1997 by way of filing writ petition in the year
2025. Thus, quite apparently the writ petition filed by the
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:15947] (4 of 7) [CW-14624/2025]
petitioner is suffering from the vice of delay and laches and,
therefore, this Court may not exercise its writ jurisdiction in favour
of a person, who was not vigilant about his right. In support of
objection with regard to delay and laches. Learned counsel for the
respondents placed reliance upon order dated 14.01.2026 passed
by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.18758/2025 (Tara Ram Sudi Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Ors.) and order dated 08.04.2025 passed in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.5703/2024 (Smt. Munni Vs. State of Rajasthan
& Ors.).
8. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted
that judgment of Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra) cannot be
made applicable in the instant case as the same was passed long
back and delay in the case of Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra)
was not as long as in the instant case.
9. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits
that the issue with regard to grant of salary to the temporary
employees appointed subsequent to 31st of December is dealt with
in accordance Rule 97 of Rajasthan Service Rules, and pursuant
thereto Government decision was taken not to grant salary to the
persons appointed subsequent to 31st of December of every year.
10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
11. It has not been disputed that the similar issue on
merits has been dealt with by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
in the case of Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra), wherein it has
been held that there is no valid justification in denial of benefit of
salary of summer vacation and increment to the persons
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:15947] (5 of 7) [CW-14624/2025]
appointed after 31st of December and relying upon such order
passed in the case of Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra), many
other orders have been passed subsequently by the different Co-
ordinate Benches of this Court.
12. As regards question of delay and laches raised by the
learned counsel for the respondents, this Court examined the
earlier order dated 28.11.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in the case of the petitioner which was decided in
presence of the Government Counsel. This Court finds that the
issue raised by the petitioner in the earlier writ petition also
relates to grievance of the petitioner with regard to non payment
of salary for summer vacation. However, in the said writ petition,
no objection with regard to delay and laches was raised on behalf
of respondent-Government. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court,
while deciding earlier writ petition of the petitioner vide order
dated 28.11.2023, took note of order passed in the case of
Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra) and since, the issue was no
longer res integra, the writ petition was disposed of by directing
the petitioner to submit a representation before the respondents.
13. The representation filed by the petitioner has been
decided by the respondents vide order dated 14.06.2024. Thus, it
is clear that fresh cause of action has arisen to the petitioner after
passing of order dated 14.06.2024. Since, issue with regard to
delay was neither raised, nor decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court, yet it can be presumed that the Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court was conscious enough with regard to alleged delay and
it is also a matter of fact that order dated 28.11.2023 passed by
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the earlier writ petition of the
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:15947] (6 of 7) [CW-14624/2025]
petitioner has attained finality and was never challenged by the
respondents. As such, this Court finds that in view of the fresh
order having been passed on 14.06.2024 giving rise to fresh cause
of action, there is no undue delay in approaching this Court by
way of filing the present writ petition and the objection raised by
learned counsel for the respondents is hereby rejected.
14. This Court also considered order dated 14.06.2024
passed by District Education Officer (Headquarter), Sirohi,
whereby representation filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.
In considered opinion of this Court, the order is totally unreasoned
and non speaking. While deciding the earlier writ petition of the
petitioner, this Court took note of the earlier judgment in the case
of Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra), it was incumbent upon the
respondents to consider the effect, applicability and consequence
of judgment in the case of Yogesh Kumar Pareek (supra), but
apparently such judgment has never been considered by the
respondents.
15. As observed hereinabove, since the issue has already
been discussed and decided in the case of Yogesh Kumar
Pareek (supra), there is no reasons for taking a different view
by this Court. Hence, in view of foregoing discussions, order dated
14.06.2024 passed by the District Education Officer (Headquarter)
Secondary Education, Sirohi is hereby quashed and set aside and
the respondents are directed to sanction and grant benefit of
salary of summer vacation of the year 1997 to the petitioner. Such
period shall also be computed for all the service benefits and
petitioner shall also be entitled for all consequential benefits.
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:15947] (7 of 7) [CW-14624/2025]
16. Necessary orders in this regard shall be passed by the
respondents within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of
copy of this order.
17. Writ Petition stands allowed accordingly.
18. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(ANAND SHARMA),J
19-Jatin
(Uploaded on 08/04/2026 at 04:38:05 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
