[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dr. Jitendra Kumar Jat vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:6670) on 5 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:6670]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2128/2026
Dr. Jitendra Kumar Jat S/o Shri Chandaram Jat, Aged About 34
Years, Resident Of Dhani Khalsa Wali, Village Kalyanpura, Tehsil
Shahpura District Jaipur, Rajasthan, Lastely Posted At
Community Health Center(Chc), Semari, District Salumber,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Medical And Health Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Joint Secretary, Medical And Health (Group-2)
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
3. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services,
Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur.
4. The District Collector Cum Chairman, Rajasthan Medicare
Relief Society, Udaipur, Raj.
5. The District Collector Cum Chairman, Rajasthan Medicare
Relief Society, Salumber, Raj.
6. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Udaipur, Raj.
7. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Salumber, Raj.
8. Block Chief Medical Officer, Semari, District Salumber,
Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Mavliya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tanuj Jain for
Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
05/02/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue
involved in the present writ petition is covered by the order dated
09.12.2025 passed by this Court in the case of Dr. Rajeev &
Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No. 23124/2025).
(Uploaded on 05/02/2026 at 05:33:38 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6670] (2 of 3) [CW-2128/2026]
2. Operative portion of the order dated 09.12.2025 passed in
the case of Dr. Rajeev (supra) reads as follows:
"1. With the consent of both the parties, the matter is
heard on final disposal.
2. The present writ petition is filed challenging the
action of the respondents in not continuing the services
of the petitioners to the post of Medical Officer on
Temporary Urgent Basis.
3. The petitioner was initially recruited to the post of
Medical Officer on Urgent Temporary Basis by way of
contract and the terms of contract clearly indicate that
any such an appointments are made subject to one
year or till the regular appointments are made,
whichever is earlier. Subsequently, by order dated
30.04.2025, the employment of the petitioners was
extended till 30.09.2025, and thereafter, there was no
extension order, therefore, they have filed the present
writ petition.
4. The case of the State is that the very contract is
for an engagement for one year or till the regular
appointments are made, whichever is earlier and their
services were not further extended for the reason that
a regular recruitment to the post of Medical Officer has
already been done and posted. Therefore, the
petitioners have no vested right to continue after the
regular appointments are made to the post of Medical
Officer.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
fairly submitted that the engagement of Medical Officer
through regular recruitment is already done and they
have no vested right to seek continuation on such post,
where the appointments are made regularly; however,
the respondents may sympathetically consider their
case for re-engagement on the vacant post, which are
unfilled with regular recruitment and such a vacant
post also be filled basing on the merit as well as period
of experience of the candidates, who were being
disengaged by virtue of regular appointments.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that
if the respondent-Authority decided to fill-up any
unfilled vacancies, which are available after filling up of
the regular vacancies, the case for reengaging the
persons may be considered sympathetically including
the case of the petitioners for re-engagement on the
(Uploaded on 05/02/2026 at 05:33:38 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6670] (3 of 3) [CW-2128/2026]
vacant/unfilled post subject to merit and period of
experience among the candidates.
7. The terms of the contract clearly indicate that
their appointment is on Temporary Basis and for a fixed
period or happening of certain eventuality of regular
appointments. Since the very discontinuation is based
on the regular appointments, the petitioners have no
vested right to continue work on the post of Medical
Officer for the reason that they have appointed on
Temporary Urgent Basis, however, when the
respondents seek to re-employ in the vacant post of
Medical Officer after regular recruitment, the case of
the petitioners or others are required to be considered
sympathetically.
8. In the above factual facts and circumstances of
the case and contentions of the parties, the writ
petition is disposed of with the directions to the
respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and
other persons if any in the vacant post of Medical
Officer on Urgent Temporary Basis, their services are
required to be considered subject to same terms and
conditions and the said consideration shall be based on
period of experience and merit.
9. Pending applications, if any stand disposed of."
3. In view of the above ratio, the present writ petition is
disposed of in the same terms as passed in the case of
Dr. Rajeev (supra). The respondents are directed to consider the
case of the petitioner and other persons if any in the vacant post
of Medical Officer on Urgent Temporary Basis, their services are
required to be considered subject to same terms and conditions
and the said consideration shall be based on period of experience
and merit.
4. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J
200-BhumikaP/-
(Uploaded on 05/02/2026 at 05:33:38 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
