[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mohan Lal Parmar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10653) on 26 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:10653]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23506/2025
1. Mohan Lal Parmar S/o Hakru Parmar, Aged About 39
Years, Ward No. 11 Parmarvada Panasi Chhoti Po Panasi
Chhoti Banswara, Presently Posted At Govt. Upper
Primary School Sajvaniya Banswara, Rajasthan.
2. Anita Kumari D/o Teja Katara, Aged About 39 Years, Chikli
Badra Post Chikli Teja Banswara, Presently Posted At
Govt. Upper Primary School Takhata Ji Ka Tanda
Banswara, Rajasthan.
3. Maya Kumari Pargi W/o Mahendra Kumar Katara, Aged
About 39 Years, Vpo Chordi Tehsil Chordi Banswara,
Presently Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School Bhatwada
Banswara, Rajasthan.
4. Kailash Kumari W/o Prafulla Paragi, Aged About 40 Years,
Ward No. 07 Patiya Galiya Bhaler Bhodar Banswara,
Presently Posted At Govt. Primary School Kundfala
Banswara, Rajasthan.
5. Gotamlal Bhuriya S/o Tejahingh Bhuriya, Aged About 41
Years, Bawaliya Pada Para Bassi Banswara, Presently
Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School Khunta Banswara,
Rajasthan.
6. Kokila Kumari Paragi W/o Bhupendra Kumar Katara, Aged
About 39 Years, Chordi Chordi Banswara, Presently
Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School Sajvaniya
Khandora Pada Vareth , Rajasthan.
7. Krishna Kumari Makvana D/o Valji Makvana, Aged About
41 Years, Ganau Ganaoo Banswara, Presently Posted At
Govt Upper Primary School Ghalkiya, Banswara,
Rajasthan.
8. Sevalal Garasiya S/o Kamajee Garasiya, Aged About 41
Years, Ward No. 08, Mukam Khunti Bijiya Post Rohanwari
Teh Gangartalai Banswara, Presently Posted At Govt.
Upper Primary School Bhatavada Banswara, Rajasthan.
(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 01:17:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 27/02/2026 at 09:46:20 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10653] (2 of 4) [CW-23506/2025]
9. Lalita Solanki D/o Rajeng, Aged About 41 Years, Ward No.
10 Village Thali Talai Post Navaghara Banswara, Presently
Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School Sajvaniya
Sundargram Banswara, Rajasthan.
10. Dev Chand Aud S/o Gava Ad, Aged About 39 Years, Ward
No. 12 Village Ukala Po Ukala Banswara, Presently Posted
At Govt. Primary School Navatapara Heera (Boriya)
Banswara, Rajasthan.
11. Ramesh Chandra Jhodiya S/o Bhur Ji, Aged About 45
Years, Vill Boriya Banswara, Presently Posted At Govt.
Upper Primary School Khunta Banswara, Rajasthan.
12. Vijendra Ninama S/o Bapulal Ninama, Aged About 39
Years, Ward No. 06 Talab Pada Village Kanela Post Devda
Tehsil Ghatol Dewada Banswara, Presently Posted At
Govt. Primary School Tapu Pipali Banswara, Rajasthan.
13. Sumitra Dindor D/o Dhirajamal, Aged About 42 Years,
Muniyakhunta Kesarwari Po Kesarwari Dist Banswara,
Presently Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School Guvadi
Banswara, Rajasthan.
14. Kailash Chandra S/o Dhulji, Aged About 39 Years, Nal
Pada Baman Parda Po Bamanparda Banswara, Presently
Posted At Govt. Upper Primary School Devji Oda
Banswara, Rajasthan.
15. Gaur Singh S/o Thavra Maida, Aged About 40 Years, Ward
No. 13 Sabbalpura Po Sabalpura Banswara, Presently
Posted At Govt. Primary School Jaswantpura Banswara,
Rajasthan.
16. Kesarimal S/o Kamji, Aged About 42 Years, Paroli
Gordhan Banswara, Presently Posted At Govt. Upper
Primary School Kalasua Pada Banswara, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 01:17:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 27/02/2026 at 09:46:20 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10653] (3 of 4) [CW-23506/2025]
Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer (Elementary Education),
Banswara.
4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary
Education, Banswara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA
Order
26/02/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy in question rests covered by the judgment passed by
a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.7283/2014: Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. Vs. State
of Rajasthan & Ors. (decided on 16.07.2014). He submits that
the petitioners would be satisfied if the respondents are directed
to decide the representation of the petitioners in light of the
aforesaid judgment.
2. In Manoj Khandelwal's case (supra), it was observed and
held as under:
"..... 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, alongwith a copy of
this order, who shall, after verifying the facts stated
above, consider and decide the same by a speaking
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
(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 01:17:12 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10653] (4 of 4) [CW-23506/2025]
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. In view of the submission made, the present writ petition is
disposed of with a direction to the competent
authority/respondents to decide the representation of the
petitioners if filed within a period of fifteen days from now. There
presentation be decided within a period of six weeks thereafter in
accordance with law and keeping in view the observations made in
the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra).
4. The order has been passed based on the submissions made
in the petition and by learned counsel for the petitioners before
this Court. The respondents would be free to examine the veracity
of the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the
averments made therein are found to be correct, appropriate
orders would be passed in favour of the petitioners.
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.
6. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand disposed
of.
(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J
300-T.Singh/-
(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 01:17:12 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
