Deepa Ram vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 25 March, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:13996]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6434/2026

1.       Deepa Ram S/o Shri Maluka Ram, Aged About 30 Years,
         Resident         Of   Gaon      Kanor,       Tehsil     Fatehgarh,      District
         Jaisalmer.
2.       Gaji Ram S/o Shri Dadu Ram, Aged About 41 Years,
         Resident Of           Mukam Post Sihedar, Tehsil Fatehgarh,
         District Jaisalmer.
3.       Smt. Dhai, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Mandha, Kheya,
         District Jaisalmer.
4.       Banwari Lal S/o Shri Ratan Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
         Gaon Deewali, Post Bhesara, Tehsil Atru, District Baran.
5.       Smt. Mamta Kumari @ Mamta Bai W/o Shri Banwari Lal,
         Aged About 33 Years, R/o Gaon Deewali, Post Bhesara,
         Tehsil Atru, District Baran.
6.       Smt. Sushila Bai W/o Late Shri Jaswant, Aged About 37
         Years, R/o Gaon Nariya Mohallah, Post Shahbad, District
         Baran.
7.       Vishnu Jatav S/o Shri Dablu Ram Jatav, Aged About 34
         Years,      R/o       Purshotampura,            Tehsil       Shahbad,    Tehsil
         Shahbad, District Baran.
8.       Smt. Sawita W/o Shri Vishnu Jatav, Aged About 30 Years,
         R/o Purshotampura, Sahol Aleti, Post Shahbad, Tehsil
         Shahbad, District Baran.
9.       Ms. Sarita Verma D/o Shri Vinod Kumar, Aged About 25
         Years, R/o Indra Colony, Rao Bapawar Kallan, Tehsil
         Sangod, District Kota.
10.      Smt. Kamlesh Verma W/o Shri Santosh Kumar, Aged
         About       33    Years,      R/o      Rataikhurd,           Chamarna    Basti,
         Dhigwani, Tehsil Shahbad, District Baran.
11.      Kalyan Singh S/o Shri Puna Ram, Aged About 42 Years,
         R/o Budanonera, Post Kaswanonera, Tehsil Shahbad,
         District Baran.
12.      Smt. Sato Bai W/o Shri Kalyan Singh, Aged About 35
         Years,      R/o       Budanonera,          Post       Kaswanonera,       Tehsil
         Shahbad, District Baran.
13.      Smt. Rukmani W/o Shri Prakash Chandra, Aged About 36
         Years, R/o Gaon Data, Post Kelwara, Tehsil Shahbad,


                           (Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 06:48:06 PM)
                          (Downloaded on 25/03/2026 at 08:55:30 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:13996]                   (2 of 5)                    [CW-6434/2026]


         District Baran.
14.      Ram Singh S/o Shri Nathiya Ram, Aged About 37 Years,
         R/o Gaon Baint, Post Shahbad, Tehsil Shahbad, District
         Baran.
15.      Ravi Kumar Jatav S/o Shri Banwari Lal Jatav, Aged About
         27 Years, R/o Mukam Rataikhurd, Post Dhikwani, Tehsil
         Shahbad, District Baran.
16.      Smt. Rashmi W/o Shri Ravi Kumar Jatav, Aged About 22
         Years, R/o Mukam Rataikhurd, Post Dhikwani, Tehsil
         Shahbad, District Baran.
17.      Deepak Meena S/o Shri Ram Kailash Meena, Aged About
         32 Years, R/o Gaon Morpa, Post Godalyaheri, Tehsil
         Ladpura, District Kota.
18.      Anil Meena S/o Shri Ram Kailash Meena, Aged About 29
         Years, R/o Gaon Morpa, Post Godalyaheri, Tehsil Ladpura,
         District Kota.
19.      Sachin S/o Shri Satyanarayan, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
         Gaon Post Kethun, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota.
20.      Devendra Kumar S/o Shri Babu Lal, Aged About 32 Years,
         R/o 290, Kachri Mohallah, Deegodpar, Tehsil Kishanganj,
         District Baran.
21.      Smt. Pushplata W/o Shri Devendra Kumar, Aged About 31
         Years, R/o 290, Kachri Mohallah, Deegodpar, Tehsil
         Kishanganj, District Baran.
22.      Bhanwar Lal S/o Shir Sardul Ram, Aged About 43 Years,
         R/o Batara Jhak, Tehsil Shiv, District Barmer.
23.      Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Shankar Lal, Aged About 33
         Years, R/o Gaon Baitu Panji, Post Baitu, Tehsil Baitu,
         District Balotra.
24.      Dharma Ram S/o Shri Ala Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
         Gaon Trimoli, Post Gadra Road, Tehsil Gadra Road, District
         Barmer.
25.      Luna Ram S/o Shri Pata Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
         Mafuri Buthiya, Post Buhiya, Tehsil Ramsar, District
         Barmer.
26.      Mukesh Kumar Bheel S/o Shri Punam Chand Bheel, Aged
         About 42 Years, R/o Gaon Jamun, Post Mandla, Tehsil
         Jhadol, District Udaipur.


                      (Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 06:48:06 PM)
                     (Downloaded on 25/03/2026 at 08:55:30 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:13996]                   (3 of 5)                        [CW-6434/2026]


27.      Krishan Kumar Gamar S/o Shri Ramdas Gamar, Aged
         About 25 Years, R/o Gaon Amaliya, Post Amaliya, Tehsil
         Jhadol, District Udaipur.
28.      Smt. Ramu Bai Gameti W/o Shri Onkar Lal Gameti, Aged
         About 44 Years, R/o Fanda Titardi, Tehsil Girwa, District
         Udaipur.
29.      Smt. Kamla Gameti W/o Shri Jagannath Gameti, Aged
         About 31 Years, R/o Fanda Titardi, Tehsil Girwa, District
         Udaipur.
30.      Achla Ram S/o Shri Ganga Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/
         o Lopli Chidiya, Post Chidiya, Tehsil Gida, District Balotra.
31.      Smt. Nirmala Devi W/o Devi Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
         R/o 3140 Ward No. 1, Arat Ka Jaav, Sivana, District
         Balotra.
32.      Smt. Champa Devi W/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 21
         Years, R/o 2195 Ward No. 1, Sivana, District Balotra.
33.      Smt. Suji Devi W/o Ghevar Ram, Aged About 52 Years, R/
         o Arat Ka Jaav, Sivana, District Balotra.
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Commissioner-
         Cum-Director     And      Secretary        To     Government,     Social
         Justice And Empowerment Department, Government Of
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       The Joint Director, Social Justice And Empowerment
         Department, Udaipur.
3.       The Joint Director, Social Justice And Empowerment
         Department, Kota.
4.       The Deputy Director, The Joint Director, Social Justice And
         Empowerment Department, Barmer.
5.       The District Probation And Social Welfare Officer, Social
         Justice And Empowerment Department, Jaisalmer.
6.       The District Probation And Social Welfare Officer, Social
         Justice And Empowerment Department, Baran.
7.       The District Probation And Social Welfare Officer, Social
         Justice And Empowerment Department, Balotra.
                                                                 ----Respondents


                      (Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 06:48:06 PM)
                     (Downloaded on 25/03/2026 at 08:55:30 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:13996]                       (4 of 5)                    [CW-6434/2026]




For Petitioner(s)             :     Ms. Ayushi Solanki
For Respondent(s)             :     ----



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

Order

25/03/2026

1. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the

matter has been heard for final disposal at the admission stage

itself.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that

the facts in the present case is similar to the facts in D.B. Civil

Writ Petition No. 11737/2024 (Rodu Lal & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors.), decided on 26.08.2025.

3. The relevant paragraphs of the order dated 26.08.2025 passed

in the case of Rodu Lal (Supra) reads as follows:- operative

portion of the order dated 26.08.2025 reads as follows:-

"41. In light of the aforesaid facts & findings and the judgments, this Court is of the opinion that Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022 has to be read harmoniously, whereby, the petitioners and similarly situated persons, who have been appointed through placement agency after issuance of public advertisement are to be covered under the ambit of Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022. Since, the above rule has been read harmoniously in favour of the petitioners, therefore, there is no requirement to decide question No. (b), which was framed under para 13. The harmonious reading of the Rule itself clarifies that, there ought to be no discrimination between the contractual employees appointed through placement agency as well as the contractual employees appointed directly.

42. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are allowed in the following terms: (i) The respondents shall consider the individual case of each contractual employee, appointed prior to enforcement of the Rules of 2022 strictly in accordance with Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, meaning thereby, that if an employee has been appointed on a post created by the Administrative Department with the concurrence of the Finance Department and the appointment has been through issuance of a public advertisement further without there being any differentiation whether the public advertisement has been

(Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 06:48:06 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:13996] (5 of 5) [CW-6434/2026]

issued by the State Government or by the placement agency.

(ii) If the case of the individual is in conformation with the Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, as interpreted above, then the benefit of the Rules of 2022 shall be extended to such petitioners.

43. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of."

4. In light of the order cited above, the present writ petition is

disposed of in the same terms as in the case of Rodu Lal & Ors.

(supra). The petitioners shall be at liberty to make a

representation before the concerned authorities within a period of

15 days. On such representation, the concerned authorities are

directed to dispose of the same in light of the decision passed in

case of Rodu Lal within a period of two months from the date of

receipt of this order.

5. All the pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

(SANJEET PUROHIT),J 150-Arjun/-

(Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 06:48:06 PM)