[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Babu Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:1323) on 12 January, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:1323]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10461/2024
Babu Lal S/o Shri Dunga Ram, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of
Village Jabdi Nagar, Tehsil Nawa City, District Deedwana-
Kuchaman (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Medical And Health Department,
Through Its Principal Secretary, Jaipur Rajasthan.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10403/2024
Prem Chand Sharma S/o Suraj Mal Sharma, Aged About 48
Years, A-9A, Sahkar Nagar, Jhotwara, Sirsi, Jaipur (Raj.)
Presently Posted As Food Safety Officer, Bhilwara.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Medical And Health Department, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
2. Commissioner, Food Safety And Drug Control At Swasthya
Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. (Raj.).
3. Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner, Ajmer
(Raj.).
4. Sakshi Jain D/o Pramod Kumar Jain, Aged About 27
Years, 62/110, Heera Path, Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Raj Singh Chauhan S/o Hanuman Singh, Aged About 33
Years, Vrindavan Colony, Behror, Alwar, Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Madhav Vyas
Mr. Devi Singh Rathore
Mr. Lokesh Mathur
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG
Mr. Rajat Arora
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
12/01/2026
1. Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that the issue
involved in the present writ petitions has been answered by the
Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.11.2025
(Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 05:14:58 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:1323] (2 of 3) [CW-10461/2024]
passed in the case of Kuldeep Singh Choudhary & Ors. Vs.
Rajasthan Public; Service Commission & Ors. (D.B. Spl.
Appl. Writ No. 790/2024) and batch of appeals.
2. The operative portion of the order dated 20.11.2025 reads
as follows:
"CONCLUSION :
15.Thus, considering the :
(i) specific provisions of Section 37 of the Act of
2006, which specifically requires the Commissioner
to notify the appointment of FSO ;
(ii) Rule 2.1.3 of the Rules of 2011 which requires
for possessing the requisite qualification on the date
on which he is so appointed ;
(iii) the Training Manual, which refers to Section 37
of the Act of2006 and Rule 2.1.3 of the Rules of
2011 and provides for an induction training to the
FSOs who are newly recruited ; and
(iv) clarification issued by the FSSAI dated
03.10.2018 ; we are of the considered opinion that
as per the literal reading of the provisions, the
requisite qualification for FSO has to be evaluated
on the date on which the notification for
appointment as FSO is issued and if the training is
successfully completed at anytime prior to it, the
same would be very much in compliance of the
provisions of Section 37 of the Act of 2006 and Rule
2.1.3 of Rules of 2011.
16. Consequently, both the D.B. Civil Special Appeal
(Writ)Nos.790/2024 and 1048/2023 stands allowed
and the impugned judgment dated 06.11.2023 passed
in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7650/2023 is set aside.
Further, D.B. Civil Special Appeal(Writ) No.1061/2025
stands dismissed and the impugned order dated
24.07.2025 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.13770/2025is upheld.
All the pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of. "
(Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 05:14:58 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:1323] (3 of 3) [CW-10461/2024]
3. Consequently, in view of the above order of the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court dated 20.11.2025 passed in the case
of Kuldeep Singh Choudhary (supra), the present writ petitions
are dismissed.
4. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J
503 & 504-BhumikaP/-
(Uploaded on 12/01/2026 at 05:14:58 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
