Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Meena Jain vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 November, 2020
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10679/2020
1. Meena Jain D/o Madan Lal Jain, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 32/18, Karjali Complex, New Sardarpura, Near Aalu Factory, Udaipur.
2. Arjun Lal Roat S/o Bhanji Roat, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Bandara Post Selaj Via Antri District Dungarpur.
3. Suresh Kumar Katara S/o Gopal Krishna Katara, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Rangela Post Genji Via Vikasnagar District Dungarpur.
4. Rajnish Damor S/o Moti Lal Damor, Aged About 39 Years, R/o House No. 11, Towar Wali Gali, Gandhi Nagar, Kalka Mata Road, Phada District Udaipur.
5. Tamkesh Kumar Suthar S/o Kantilal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Sundani Tehsil Garhi District Banswara.
6. Mukesh Kumar Rawal S/o Bhagwanlal Rawal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Vpo Bhemal Tehsil Galiyakot District Dungarpur.
7. Mohan Lal Nayak S/o Beneshwar Nayak, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vpo Motatanda Tehsil Ganora District Banswara.
8. Pavan Bunkar S/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Makhliya Kala Post Saredi Chhoti Tehsil Garhi District Banswara.
9. Rajendra Damor S/o Ranchod Lal Damor, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Oda Bada Via Kanba Tehsil Bichhiwara District Dungarpur.
10. Dheeraj Damor S/o Goma Damor, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Bagayacha Post Vadlipara Tehsil Kushalgarh District Banswara.
11. Mahesh Patidar S/o Galji Patidar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vpo Daduka Tehsil Garhi District Banswara.
12. Bavita Faujdar D/o Bhagwat Singh Faujdar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village And Post Naya Ganv Khalsa Tehsil Bhusawar, District Bharatpur.
13. Shailendra Singh S/o Biri Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Naya Khalsa Tehsil Bhusawar, District (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:00:25 PM) (2 of 5) [CW-10679/2020] Bharatpur.
14. Punam Chand Garasia S/o Nana Lal Garasia, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Dharawan Post Lathuni, Tehsil Jhadol District Udaipur.
15. Kalawati Purbia D/o Manna Lal Purbia, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 62, Mela Ground Road, Jhadol, District Udaipur.
16. Chetna Dharu D/o Bhagirath Dharu, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Water Works Road, Ward No. 16, Sangariya District Hanumangarh.
17. Murti S/o Lavji, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Vageri Maida Post Nalda Tehsil Abapura District Banswara.
18. Dinesh Chandra Ninama S/o Devji Ninama, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Fatehpura Post Aabapura District Banswara.
19. Bahadur Singh Charpota S/o Kaliya Charpota, Aged About 36 Years, Village Khodipipali Post Kesarpura, District Banswara.
20. Sandeep S/o Manphool, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village And Post Kirdoli Tehsil Dhod District Sikar.
21. Radhey Shyam Kothyari S/o Babu Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/i Village Jaitpura Post Borda Tehsil Bonli District Sawaimadhopur.
22. Kavita Chouhan D/o Kishan Lal Chouhan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 1323/13, Hari Om Sadan, Khanpura Road, Subhash Nagar, Ajmer.
23. Geeta Mandiwal W/o Sunil Dipawat, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vpo Padu Khurd Tehsil Riyan Badi District Nagaur.
24. Karishma Mewara D/o Kishan Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 3/18, Nand Nagar Ward No. 28 Beawar District Ajmer.
25. Damodar Prasad Saini S/o Laddu Lal Saini, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Boli, Ramshala Chouk, Shyopari Wala, Badiyon Mai, Tehsil Boli District Sawaimadhopur.
26. Samiksha Kumari Sharma D/o Jogendra Kumar Sharma, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ramesh Apartment, Shri Gopal Nagar, Masuda Road, Beawar District Ajmer.
27. Kalsum Bano D/o Bashir Mohammed, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vimal Kirana Store Balita Road, Kunhadi, Kota.
28. Nikki Meena D/o Ramkishor Meena, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gurukul Colony, Neem Ka Thana Road, Ajeetgarh (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:00:25 PM) (3 of 5) [CW-10679/2020] District Sikar.
29. Sanjay Pal S/o Satya Kumar Vishnoi, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Sediya, Sanchore District Jalore.
30. Uma Sidh D/o Magannath, Aged About 27 Years, R/o 7/9, Hanuman Bag Colony, Nagaur.
31. Kamlesh Kumar Meghwal S/o Bhairaram Meghwal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vpo Samandsar Tehsil Shridungargarh District Bikaner.
----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Secondary Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
4. Joint Director, School Education, Jodhpur Division, Jodhpur.
5. Joint Director, School Education, Pali Division, Pali.
6. Joint Director, School Education, Udaipur Division, Udaipur.
7. Joint Director, School Education, Kota Division, Kota.
8. Joint Director, School Education, Jaipur Division, Jaipur.
9. Joint Director, School Education, Bharatpur, Bharatpur.
10. Joint Director, School Education, Churu Division, Churu.
11. Joint Director, School Education, Ajmer Division, Ajmer.
12. Joint Director, School Education, Bikaner Division, Bikaner.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Prajapat JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order 05/11/2020 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:00:25 PM) (4 of 5) [CW-10679/2020] of this Court in Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. :
S.B.C.W.P. No. 7283/2014, decided on 16.07.2014 at Jaipur Bench and the said judgment has been followed in Krishan Lal & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 19179/2017, decided on 30.10.2017 at Jaipur Bench. The petitioners are also entitled to the same relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and Krishan Lal (supra) claims learned counsel.
In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of with the similar directions as given in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra), which read as under:-
"This Court in Suman Bai and Another Vs. State and Others - 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, held that candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached court earlier. Petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such situation and their writ petition not barred either as res judicata or as being him in properly constituted. This directed the respondents to treat petitioners senior to respondents, who were in lower order of merit.
It is further contended in the writ petition that in the matter of School Lecturers (English) in the same Department, where appointments were delayed because of the fault of the State authorities, the candidates were accorded appointment from the date the candidates stood lower in merit were appointed and they have been granted all consequential benefits of services.
The petitioners approached the respondents by way of representations for extending them same benefits of service which have been granted to the candidates who stood lower in merit than the petitioners, but till date nothing has been done. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of the petitioners for a direction to the respondents to treat their appointment from the date the candidates lower in merit, were given, with all consequential benefits of service, such as seniority, continuity of service, pay fixation, grant of annual grade increments.
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 getting (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:00:25 PM) (5 of 5) [CW-10679/2020] 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."
For the purpose aforesaid, the petitioners shall file representation before the competent authority giving out the requisite details along with certified copy of the order instant within a period of four weeks from today. On receipt of the representation, the concerned respondent shall decide the same, in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation and accord notional benefits to the petitioners from the date persons similarly situated to them and lower in merit were given appointment.
Upon consideration of the representation so filed, if respondents find the case(s) of the petitioner (s) to be covered by the judgment(s) aforesaid, before giving actual benefits, an undertaking shall be procured from the concerned petitioner(s) to the effect that their rights/entitlements shall be subservient to the fate of the judgment(s) aforesaid and in case the same is reversed or modified in any manner, he/she shall also be liable for restitution of any benefits/emoluments so received.
The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 86-A.Arora/-
(Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:00:25 PM)Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)