Surendra Sharma vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 16 January, 2026

Author: Rekha Borana

Bench: Rekha Borana

[2026:RJ-JD:2662]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                           JODHPUR
            S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17757/2025

Surendra Sharma S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad Sharma, Aged
About 38 Years, Resident Of Sherpura, Tehsil Bhadra, District
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
                                                 ----Petitioner
                            Versus
1.    The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Gramin
      Vikas And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of
      Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.    Zila Parishad, Hanumangarh Through Its Executive
      Officer.
3.    Panchayat    Samiti      Hanumangarh,   Through       Its
      Development Officer.
                                             ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :    Mr. Manish Patel
For Respondent(s)             :    Mr. Pawan Bharti for
                                   Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG


              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

16/01/2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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.13204/2024: Goverdhan Kumar Vs. The State

of Rajasthan & Ors. and other connected matters (decided on

23.09.2024).

2. Learned counsel for the respondent-Department does not

refute the above submission and agrees that the present issue

would be covered by the said judgment.

3. In the case of Goverdhan Kumar (supra), it was observed

and held as under:

"The harmonious reading of the above referred Section and Rules clearly shows that the appointing authority of the LDCs (Junior Assistant) in the respondent Department is District Establishment Committee and after the District Establishment

(Uploaded on 16/01/2026 at 06:33:07 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:2662] (2 of 4) [CW-17757/2025]

committee selects the candidates on the post of LDCs, the seniority list is prepared by it in order of merit, thereafter, the candidates are sent to the different Panchayat Samities and Zila Parishads on the basis of the recommendations received. The Legislature has made the provision in such a fashion that theselections are made in a most transparent manner. The criteria adopted by the Legislature for selection and appointment of the LDCs by the different Panchayat Samities and Zila Parishads has been devised with a pious intention to minimize and to avoid different yardsticks in the selection process.

Looked at from another angle, if the date of appointment/joining of a candidate is taken into consideration for preparation of the seniority list, it may lead to discrepancies and chaotic/haphazard situation. For example, if a person who stood higher in the select list/merit list and was directed to join at a particular Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad, but for reasons beyond his/her control, he/she is unable to join on the given date and if a person lower in merit joins the place of posting earlier to that person, he will be given seniority above the meritorious person. For no fault of a senior person, he will loose his seniority viz-a-viz a junior person who has joined earlier despite being lower in merit. Such course of action was never intended by the legislature, therefore, the scheme of things as devised by the legislature, clearly shows that the seniority of LDC (Junior Assistant) should be assigned as per the merit list prepared by the District Establishment Committee.

In the considered opinion of this court, in order to maintain transparency and smooth functioning in the Panchayati Raj Department, the procedure of preparing the seniority list on the basis of merit has been devised.

This court is not inclined to take a different view from the view which has been taken by this court in the case of Bimla (supra). In the case of Bimla (supra), in similar set of facts, it was held that while preparing the seniority list of LDCs for promotion to the post of UDC (Senior Assistant), the respondents are required to adhere to Rule 285 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 and take into consideration merit position of a candidate while preparing the seniority list.

(Uploaded on 16/01/2026 at 06:33:07 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:2662] (3 of 4) [CW-17757/2025]

The operative portion of the judgment rendered by this court in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.472/2023 Bimla V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 21.08.2024 is quoted as under:-

"8. Since the petitioner was appointed on the post of LDC (Junior Assistant) on 26.06.2013 and he joined the post of LDC on 27.06.2013, therefore, the name of the petitioner should be reflected in the seniority list as per the merit list prepared by the respondents while giving appointment to the petitioner along with other candidates.

9. The basis for preparing the seniority list of the LDCs should be the merit position of a candidate reflected in the appointment order which should be taken into consideration while preparing the seniority list of the candidates (LDCs). Since learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dateof joining of the petitioner has been taken into consideration while preparing the seniority list, therefore, the respondents are directed to re-

examine the matter and if the date of joining has been taken into consideration while preparing the seniority list of the LDCs, then the same is required to be corrected taking into consideration the merit position of the petitioner in the appointment order and if any person, who is junior to the petitioner in the merit as reflected in the appointment order has been given promotion, the case of the petitioner should be considered viz-a- viz that person.

10. In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner in light of the Rule 285 of the Rules of 1996 taking into account the merit position of the petitioner in the appointment order while preparing the seniority list of LDC (Junior Assistant) for promotion to the post of UDC (Senior Assistant), within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order."

(Uploaded on 16/01/2026 at 06:33:07 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:2662] (4 of 4) [CW-17757/2025]

In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to therespondents to re- frame the seniority list of the petitioner for promotion to the post of UDC (Senior Assistant) taking into consideration her position in the merit list prepared by the District Establishment Committee at the time of her appointment and not her date of joining/appointment, in accordance with law.

The necessary exercise shall be undertaken by the respondents within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13204/2024 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13901/2024 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14195/2024 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14259/2024 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14438/2024:-

All the above writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the order of even date passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.11757/2024 (Krishna Shekhawat V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors.).

All pending application (s) also stand disposed of. "

4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is also

disposed of on the same terms and conditions as in Goverdhan

Kumar (supra).

5. The order has been passed based on the submissions made

in the petition. 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, the

petitioners would be entitled to the relief.