[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rajendra Singh vs Rajasthan State Road Transport ... on 6 February, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2024/2026
Rajendra Singh S/o Jatan Singh, Aged About 56 Years, R/o
Gupta Bhawan Ke Piche, Opposite Mahila Mandal School,
Kuchuilpura Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Headquarter
Jaipur Through Managing Director.
2. Indra Godara, Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road
Transport Corporation, Bikaner Depot.
3. Executive Director (Administration), Rajasthan State Road
Transport Corporation, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemshankar Vyas.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suniel Purohit.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
06/02/2026
1. With the consent of learned counsel for both parties, the writ
petition is heard on final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
challenging the inaction of Chief Manager in forwarding the name
of petitioner as per the Circular dated 09.10.2025 (Annex.-6) and
wrongfully withholding the salary of the petitioner without
communicating any reasons.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was
initially appointed as driver in the respondent - corporation and
subsequently, on the basis of the opinion of the medical board, he
was shifted to office work instead of driver duties as the medical
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:16:00 PM)
(2 of 5) [CW-2024/2026]
board opined that the petitioner was unfit to discharge driver
duties.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was subjected to examination by medical board and the medical
board opined that the petitioner is unfit to discharge driver duties;
as such he was posted on civil duties by various proceedings.
5. It is also his contention that though the order to work in the
civil duties was in force and without communicating any order to
the petitioner, the salary of the petitioner has been withheld.
Therefore, he seeks relief from this Court.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that though
there are opinions from the previous medical boards, by virtue of
the letter dated 20.11.2025, all drivers who were earlier declared
unfit were directed to undergo medical test. This order cannot be
challenged. If the medical board found the petitioner unfit, he will
be continued on the same duties and not that of driver.
7. This Court has considered the issue dealing with similar kind
of letter/circular and has given certain directions in the case of
Mubarak Hussain Vs. The Rajasthan State Road Transport
Corporation & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21347/2025)
decided on 04.11.2025. Relevant paragraphs (No.5 & 6) of the
order dated 04.11.2025 read as follows:
"5. Considering the contentions of both the parties,
this Court finds that the circular dated 09.10.2025
which has been sought to review all the cases of drivers
who were earlier declared unfit by virtue of the previous
medical board's reports and such course has been
adopted to overcome the shortage of drivers. The
petitioner is duty bound to appear before the medical
board for review of his fitness which is only sought to
be achieved under the impugned circular. The petitioner
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:16:00 PM)
(3 of 5) [CW-2024/2026]
has already submitted a representation to the Chief
Manager of the concerned depot requesting to refer his
case to the headquarters which in turn will fix the date
and time for appearance of the petitioner before the
medical board as referred in the circular and if the
medical board opines that the petitioner is unfit, he can
be assigned the non-driver functions. In light of the
above factual background, this Court is inclined to
dispose of the writ petition.
6. As a result, the writ petition is disposed of as
follows:
i. The respondent No. 4 - Chief Depot
Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport
Corporation, Banswara Depot, District Banswara
is directed to forward the representation of the
petitioner, if any filed, to the headquarters. If no
representation is filed, liberty is given to the
petitioner to file fresh representation within a
period of one week from today.
ii. The headquarters shall fix the date and
time for appearance of the petitioner before the
fresh medical board and such date and time
shall be intimated to the petitioner.
iii. On such intimation, the petitioner shall
positively appear before the medical board on
the fixed date and time.
iv. If the petitioner fails to appear before the
medical board on the fixed date and time
without any reasonable cause, the respondent
authorities are at liberty to take appropriate
action.
v. After medical examination of the
petitioner, if the medical board finds the
petitioner unfit to perform driver duties, the
petitioner shall not be assigned driver duties and
he shall be assigned other duties.
vi. Till the report is submitted by the fresh
medical board, the petitioner shall be allowed to
continue the work that he is already
discharging."
8. This Court also found that there is no justification for the
respondents to withhold the salary of the petitioner when there is
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:16:00 PM)
(4 of 5) [CW-2024/2026]
no specific order in this regard. As long as the petitioner is
discharging his duties in the civil post as per the orders passed by
the respondents, they are duty bound to extend the salary unless
any other specific order is in force withholding the salary which
has been communicated to the petitioner.
9. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the present
writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
i. The respondent No. 2 - Chief Manager, Rajasthan State
Road Transport Corporation, Bikaner Depot is directed to
forward the representation of the petitioner, if any filed, to
the headquarters. If no representation is filed, liberty is
given to the petitioner to file fresh representation within a
period of one week from today.
ii. The headquarters shall fix the date and time for
appearance of the petitioner before the fresh medical board
and such date and time shall be intimated to the petitioner.
iii. On such intimation, the petitioner shall positively
appear before the medical board on the fixed date and time.
iv. If the petitioner fails to appear before the medical
board on the fixed date and time without any reasonable
cause, the respondent authorities are at liberty to take
appropriate action.
v. After medical examination of the petitioner, if the
medical board finds the petitioner unfit to perform driver
duties, the petitioner shall not be assigned driver duties and
he shall be assigned other duties.
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:16:00 PM)
(5 of 5) [CW-2024/2026]
vi. Till the report is submitted by the fresh medical board,
the petitioner shall be allowed to continue the work that he
is already discharging.
vii. Additionally, the respondents are directed to pay the
arrears of salary to the petitioner and continue to pay the
regular salary till a proper decision is taken on the opinion of
the fresh medical board.
viii. Liberty is given to the respondents to seek recall with
regard to the direction to pay the salary to the petitioner if
any specific order to withhold the salary was passed in
accordance with law. It is also made clear that salary/arrears
shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of 15 days.
10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J
131-PKS/-
(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:16:00 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
