Sanjay Kumar Meena vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 19 February, 2026

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2026:RJ-JD:9313]

   HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
                     S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3944/2026

1.       Sanjay Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Raju Lal Meena, Aged About 27
         Years, R/o Village Post Kuchalwara Khurd, Tikar, Dist. Bhilwara
         (Raj.).

2.       Aphak Ahamed Bhutto S/o Sh. Jahuru Ddeen Bhutto, Aged
         About 51 Years, R/o Village Post Bus Station Ke Pas,
         Khawaspura, Jodhpur (Raj.).

3.       Rakesh S/o Sh. Amara Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village
         Post Benan, Bilara, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

4.       Wela Ram Bheel S/o Sh. Mohan Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/
         o Village Post 379 Bhilo Ka Bas, Dhundhara, District Jodhpur
         (Raj.).

5.       Nrsinga Ram S/o Sh. Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
         Village Post Meghwalo Ka Bas, Jur, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

6.       Deepak Kumar Khorwal S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Raigar, Aged
         About 31 Years, R/o Village Post Ward No. 07, Dhaula, District
         Jaipur (Raj.).

7.       Mohan Lal Mosalpuri S/o Sh. Jagasdish Ram, Aged About 36
         Years, R/o Village Post Jatiyo Ka Bas, Bhopalgarh, District
         Jodhpur (Raj.).

8.       Sunil Meena S/o Sh. Raja Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
         Village Post Jhalimpura, Sultanpur, District Kota (Raj.).

9.       Mada Ram Meghwal S/o Sh. Tilla Ram, Aged About 40 Years,
         R/o Village Post Meghwalo Ka Bas, Bagarki, Riyan, District
         Jodhpur (Raj.).

10.      Babu Lal S/o Sh. Mangi Lal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village
         Post      Inside   3Rd     Pole,     Meghwalo         Ki   Basti,   Shivpuri,
         Mahamandir, Jodhpur (Raj.).

11.      Jaiprakash S/o Sh. Mahendra Kumar, Aged About 52 Years, R/
         o Village Post Mundelo Ka Bas, Khangata, District Jodhpur
         (Raj.).

12.      Hasti Mal Chouhan S/o Sh. Narsingh Ram, Aged About 56
         Years, R/o Village Post Jatiyon Ka Bas, Bisalpur, District
         Jodhpur (Raj.).

13.      Sumer Dewasi S/o Sh. Sukha Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
         Village Post Chirdhani, Pipar City, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

14.      Badree Lal S/o Sh. Lala Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village
         Post Bhanwariyo Ki Dhani, Bhanwariya Nagar, Surpura Khurd,


                         (Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 01:40:31 PM)
                        (Downloaded on 19/02/2026 at 06:00:30 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:9313]                      (2 of 4)                        [CW-3944/2026]


         District Jodhpur (Raj.).

15.      Santosh Meena S/o Sh. Maida Ram Meena, Aged About 36
         Years, R/o Village Post Manpura, Salempura, District Dausa
         (Raj.).

16.      Dinesh S/o Sh. Basti Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village
         Post Hudo Ki Dhani, Ramadavas Khurd, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

17.      Sumer Singh S/o Sh. Kana Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o
         Village Post Dudiyo Ki Dhani, Malar, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

18.      Jahan Ara D/o Sh. Nisar Ahmed, Aged About 52 Years, R/o
         Village Post Sundar Balaji Colony, Shyam Mandir Ke Piche, Gali
         No. 08, Chopasani Gaon, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

19.      Chuna Ram S/o Sh. Purkha Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
         Village Post Malaniyo Ki Dhani, Neora, Tehsil Osiyan, District
         Jodhpur (Raj.).

20.      Rakesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Sodhan Meena, Aged About 28
         Years, R/o Village Post Kalakhet, Girwarpura, District Ajmer
         (Raj.).

21.      Pappu Ram Jat S/o Sh. Birda Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
         Village Post Gopasariya, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

22.      Amiya Meghwal W/o Sh. Hukma Ram Bhati, Aged About 49
         Years, R/o Village Post Gousai Colony, Manaklao, District
         Jodhpur (Raj.).

23.      Kailash Kumar Vishnoi S/o Sh. Jora Ram, Aged About 42
         Years, R/o Village Post Sirmandi, Tehsil Osiyan, District
         Jodhpur (Raj.).

24.      Madan Bhati S/o Sh. Purkha Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
         Village Post Main Road, Rungari, District Pali (Raj.).

25.      Mamta Bomesh D/o Sh. Sohan Lal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
         Village Post Khinwara, Tehsil Rani, District Pali (Raj.).

26.      Kamal Kishor S/o Sh. Ram Narayan, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
         Village Post Dotolai, Merta, District Nagaur (Raj.).

27.      Vijay Kumar Changal S/o Sh. Rupa Ram Changal, Aged About
         31 Years, R/o Village Post Deediya Kalan, District Nagaur
         (Raj.).

                                                                      ----Petitioners

                                       Versus

1.       The   State   Of    Rajasthan,        Through       The   Additional   Chief
         Secretary, School Education, Department And Language And

                        (Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 01:40:31 PM)
                       (Downloaded on 19/02/2026 at 06:00:30 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:9313]                         (3 of 4)                          [CW-3944/2026]


          Library     Department          And        Panchayati       Raj   (Elementary
          Education) Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2.        The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3.        The    Director,    Elementary         Education       And    Panchayati   Raj
          Department, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

4.        The     District   Education        Officer,     Headquarter,      Elementary
          Education, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

5.        The     District   Education        Officer,     Headquarter,      Elementary
          Education, District Phalodi, Rajasthan.

6.        The     District    Education        Officer,     Headquarter,      Secondary
          Education, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

7.        The     District    Education        Officer,     Headquarter,      Secondary
          Education, District Phalodi, Rajasthan.

                                                                       ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)               :    Mr. OP Sangwa



                    HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

19/02/2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised

in the present writ petition is squarely covered by order in Dashrath

Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.Civil Writ Petition

No.13935/2023, decided on 18.09.2023 and therefore, similar

directions may be issued in the present case.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the said

aspect.

3. In the case of Dashrath Singh (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court, inter alia, observed and directed as under:-

"1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioners have raised a grievance that at the time of initial appointment, they had chosen District Jalore as their preference and they were accorded posting in such district, however, after creation of District Sanchore as a

(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 01:40:31 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9313] (4 of 4) [CW-3944/2026]

new district, their area of posting has fallen under District Sanchore. The petitioners want to have their posting in District Jalore.

2. It is the contention of the petitioners that opportunity to fill option forms for changing preferred district have been given to similar employees by the Director, Secondary Education, however, no such opportunity has been given to the petitioners, who want to remain in District Jalore, though their area of posting after creation of District Sanchore falls under Sanchore.

3. The present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file a representation before the Director, Secondary Education along with certified copy of the order instant and requisite documents, including the notification creating District Sanchore as a separate district.

4. In case, any representation along with the certified copy of the order instant is addressed, the Director, Secondary Education shall consider petitioners' representation in accordance with law and call for option from the petitioners within a period of one month from today.

5. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioners' grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.