[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Manju Kumari vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:5456) on 30 January, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:5456]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 787/2026
Manju Kumari D/o Jagdish Parsad, W/o Niran Ram, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Ward No. 12, Pakka Saharna, Tehsil Hanumangarh,
District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Social Justice And
Empowerment Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
3. The District Collector, Hanumangarh (Raj.)
4. The Sub Division Officer, Hanumangarh, District
Hanumangarh (Raj.)
5. The Tehsildar, Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Beniwal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.R. Paliwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
30/01/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that
the controversy raised in the present writ petition is similar to the
one raised in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14796/2025
(Poonam Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) decided on
18.08.2025. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the
said writ petition while relying upon the judgment passed in writ
petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9180/2025 (Sunita
Rani Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) decided on 26.05.2025.
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 05:18:02 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5456] (2 of 4) [CW-787/2026]
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present
writ petition may also be disposed of in the same terms as
Poonam (supra). The order dated 18.08.2025 passed in said writ
petition is reproduced herein below:
"1.Both the learned counsels submit that the facts
involved in the present case are similar to the facts in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9180/2025 (Sunita Rani Vs.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.),decided on 26.05.2025.
2.In the case of Sunita Rani (supra), this Court has held
as follows:-
"2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondents have erroneously declined to issue the EWS
certificate in favour of the petitioner solely on the
premise that she has an OBC certificate issued by the
State of Haryana whereas as per circular dated
20.10.2023 (Annexure9), any woman who migrates to
the State of Rajasthan after marriage, although would
not be entitled for the benefit qua OBC category but
then would definitely be entitled for issuance of an EWS
certificate as a General category candidate, if she
belongs to the EWS category.
3.Learned counsel for the respondent - State is not in a
position to refute the above submission in terms of
circular dated 20.10.2023 (Annexure-9).
4. It is an admitted position that the petitioner has
migrated to the State of Rajasthan after her marriage.
It is also an admitted position that she has been denied
the issuance of an EWS certificate solely on the premise
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 05:18:02 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5456] (3 of 4) [CW-787/2026]
that her OBC category certificate was issued by the
State of Haryana. Furthermore, it is an admitted
position that the petitioner applied for the EWS
certificate considering herself to be a General category
candidate.
5. Circular dated 20.10.2023 (Annexure-9) provides
asunder:-
ÞvU; jkT; dh efgyk dks vks-ch-lh- izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij jktLFkku esa fdlh Hkh HkrhZ
esa vks-ch-lh- oxZ dk vkj{k.k ns; ugha gS] ijUrq vks-ch-lh- izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij mls
vkj{k.k ds vykok vU; ykHk izkIr gks ldrs gSaA vr% vU; jkT; dh dksbZ vks-ch-
lh- ;qorh jktLFkku esa fdlh vks-ch-lh- ;qod ds "kknh djrh gS vkSj mlus jktLFkku esa
vks-ch-lh- dk izek.ki= ugha cuok;k gS rks mls jktLFkku esa lkekU; oxZ dh ekurs gq, bZ-
MCY;w-,l- dk izek.k i= tkjh fd;k tk ldrk gSA ,slh ;qorh dks bZ-MCY;w-,l- dk izek.k
i= ds vk/kkj ij HkfrZ;ksa esa bZ-MCY;w-,l- vkj{k.k dkYkkHk fey ldrk gSA
vU; jkT;ksa ds vkjf{kr oxksZa ds ,sls vH;FkhZ tks fookgksijkUr jktLFkku jkT; ds
ewy fuoklh cu x;s gS] dks bZ-MCY;w-,l- vkj{k.k ds lEcU/k rnuqlkj dk;Zokgh dh tk;sAß
6. In view of the above specific Clause, the present writ
petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent
authorities to consider the application (Annexure-5) of
the petitioner as filed for issuance of an EWS certificate.
If the petitioner complies with all the other conditions as
prescribed for issuance of an EWS certificate, she be
issued the same in accordance with law within a period
of four weeks from now. The earlier rejection of the
application would not preclude the competent authority
from reconsidering the application."
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 05:18:02 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5456] (4 of 4) [CW-787/2026]
3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is also
disposed of in the same terms as in the case of Sunita
Rani (supra).
4. All the pending applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of."
3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not oppose the
submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is
disposed of in the same terms as was decided in the case of
Poonam (supra). The respondents shall consider and decide the
application of the petitioner seeking EWS certificate within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of
this order.
5. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J
5-AbhishekK/-
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 05:18:02 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
