[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Parmanand vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 9 February, 2026
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2026:RJ-JD:6998-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 259/2026
Parmanand S/o Indraj Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Gram
Panchyat15-16 Kwd, Panchayat Samiti Rawatsar, District
Hanumangarh (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan.
4. The Commissioner (Egs), Rural Development And
Panchayat Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan.
5. The District Collector Cum District Programme
Coordinator, Egs, District Hanumangarh.
6. The Chief Executive Officer Cum Additional District
Programme Coordinator, Egs, Zila Parishad, District
Hanumangarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG
Mr. Ayush Gehlot
Mr. Pawan Bharti for
Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
09/02/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners may be permitted to file representation in light of the
(Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 03:30:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6998-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-259/2026]
order dated 26.08.2025 passed by a Co-Ordinate Bench of this
Hon'ble Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11737/2024 titled as
Rodu Lal & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. and connected
batch of petitions.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents are agreeable to the
aforesaid proposition and submit that the representation shall be
decided in light of the decision rendered in Rodu Lal (supra).
3. The operative portion of the aforementioned order dated
26.08.2025 reads as follows:
"40. This Court is further of the firm opinion that if
the respondents continue with the services of the
petitioners, without covering them under the Rules of
2022 would be against the principles as enumerated by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in a catena of judgments wherein
the Court has opined that the practice of appointment of
contractual employees without any rules would lead to a
situation of exploitation by the employer. With this intent
only, the Rules of 2022 have been framed and therefore,
the benefit of the said rules cannot be denied to the
petitioners and similarly situated persons merely on the
count of having been appointed through placement
agency.
41. In light of the aforesaid facts & findings and the
judgments, this Court is of the opinion that Rule 3 of the
Rules of 2022 has to be read harmoniously, whereby, the
petitioners and similarly situated persons, who have been
appointed through placement agency after issuance of
public advertisement are to be covered under the ambit
of Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022. Since, the above rule has
been read harmoniously in favour of the petitioners,
therefore, there is no requirement to decide question No.
(b), which was framed under para 13. The harmonious
reading of the Rule itself clarifies that, there ought to be
no discrimination between the contractual employees
(Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 03:30:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6998-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-259/2026]
appointed through placement agency as well as the
contractual employees appointed directly.
42. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are
allowed in the following terms:
(i) The respondents shall consider the individual case of
each contractual employee, appointed prior to
enforcement of the Rules of 2022 strictly in accordance
with Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022,meaning thereby, that if
an employee has been appointed on a post created by the
Administrative Department with the concurrence of the
Finance Department and the appointment has been
through issuance of a public advertisement further
without there being any differentiation whether the public
advertisement has been issued by the State Government
or by the placement agency.
(ii) If the case of the individual is in conformation with
the Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, as interpreted above,
then the benefit of the Rules of 2022 shall be extended to
such petitioners."
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of while
directing the respondents to decide the representation of the
petitioner expeditiously while keeping into consideration the
decision rendered in Rodu Lal (supra).
5. The stay application as well as pending application(s), if any,
also stand disposed of.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
14-nirmala/-
(Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 03:30:26 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
