[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ramjeevan Faroda vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 12 February, 2026
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2026:RJ-JD:7913]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3519/2026
Ramjeevan Faroda S/o Shri Omprakash Faroda, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Village Chhapri, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur
Rajasthan. Presently Working As Lecturer At Government Senior
Secondary School, Gawar, Tehsil Kumbhalgarh, District
Rajsamand Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Binja Ram
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
12/02/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject
matter in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the
order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on
13.11.2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16879/2019 titled as
'Jetha Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.'.
2. The relevant part of the aforesaid order dated 13.11.2019
reads as follows:
"This writ petition has been filed by petitioner seeking
relief as indicated in the writ petition.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that
the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered
by judgment of this Court in Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. v. State
of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.C.W.P. No. 7283/2014, decided on
16.07.2014 at Jaipur Bench and the said judgment has been
(Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 06:02:17 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:7913] (2 of 3) [CW-3519/2026]
followed in Krishan Lal & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. :
S.B.C.W.P. No. 19179/2017, decided on 30.10.2017 at Jaipur
Bench, and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same
relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and
Krishan Lal (supra).
In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed
by the petitioner is disposed of with the similar directions as
given in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra), which read as
under:-
"This Court in Suman Bai and Another Vs. State
and Others - 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, held that
candidates in lower order of merit cannot be come
entitled merely because they had approached court
earlier. Petitioners had a fresh cause of action for
approaching in such situation and their writ petition
not barred either as res judicata or as being him in
properly constituted. This directed the respondents to
treat petitioners senior to respondents, who were in
lower order of merit.
It is further contended in the writ petition that
in the matter of School Lecturers (English) in the same
Department, where appointments were delayed
because of the fault of the State authorities, the
candidates were accorded appointment from the date
the candidates stood lower in merit were appointed
and they have been granted all consequential benefits
of services.
The petitioners approached the respondents by
way of representations for extending them same
benefits of service which have been granted to the
candidates who stood lower in merit than the
petitioners, but till date nothing has been done.
Hence, this writ petition on behalf of the petitioners
for a direction to the respondents to treat their
appointment from the date the candidates lower in
merit, were given, with all consequential benefits of
service, such as seniority, continuity of service, pay
fixation, grant of annual grade increments.
Having regard to the facts of the case, writ
petition is disposed of requiring the petitioners to
make a representation to respondent no.2 - Director,
Secondary Education, Bikaner, along with a copy of
this order, who shall, after verifying the facts stated
above, consider and decide the same by a speaking
(Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 06:02:17 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:7913] (3 of 3) [CW-3519/2026]
order within a period of three months from the date
of its making, addressing the grievance of the
petitioners for extending them the relief as prayed for,
as the candidates, who stood lower in merit, are
getting benefit of higher pay, seniority, annual grade
increments and other service benefits including the
selection scales. If the respondent no.2 decides to
place the petitioners above in seniority than the
candidates who stood lower in merit, then the
petitioners would be entitled to all benefits of
seniority but they would be entitled only to notional
benefits."
3. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in same
terms as passed in the case of Jetha Ram (supra).
4. All the pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
surabhii/183-
(Uploaded on 12/02/2026 at 06:02:17 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
