Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Namonarayan Sharma And Ors vs State Of Raj And Ors on 8 January, 2020
Bench: Sabina, Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 908/2017
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2390/2017
1. Namonarayan Sharma S/o Ram Babu Sharma, R/o Vivek
Vihar Colony, Near Stadium, District Karauli, Rajasthan.
2. Heera Lal Sharma S/o Shri Kailash Chander Sharma,
Village Dhiradi, Post Shekhpura, Tehsil Sikrai, District
Dausa, Rajasthan.
3. Niranjan Lal Sharma S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, R/o
Village Shyampur Mundri, Post Mahu, Ibrahimpur, Tehsil
Hindauncity, District Karauli.
4. Hariom Tiwari S/o Shri Ghanshyam Lal Tiwari, R/o Sahari
Gali, Marwad Mundawa, Tehsil Marwad Mundawa, District
Nagaur, Rajasthan.
5. Prem Prakash Sharma S/o Radha Kishan Sharma, R/o
Meharwand, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur,
Rajasthan.
----Appellants
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department
Of Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Rajasamand.
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pali.
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jhalawar.
5. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pratapgarh.
6. Murari Lal Suman S/o Shri Kastur Chand Suman, R/o V/p
Thamkhera, Tehsil Anta, District Baran, Rajasthan.
7. Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o
Footolav, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 792/2017 Omprakash Sewda S/o Dewa Ram Sweda, R/o Village Loharana, Post Chosla, Tehsil Nawa City District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
----Appellant
(Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM)
(2 of 10) [SAW-908/2017]
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary-Cum-
Commissioner, Panchayat Raj, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Nagaur.
3. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Chittorgarh.
4. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Bhilwara.
5. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Jalore.
6. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Jaipur.
7. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Jhalawar.
8. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Rajsamand.
9. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Alwar.
10. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Pali.
11. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Pratapgarh.
12. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Barmer.
13. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Churu.
14. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Tonk.
15. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Ganganagar.
16. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Baran.
17. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Bharatpur.
18. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Ajmer.
19. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (3 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] Controller, Zila Parishad, Bundi.
20. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Kota.
21. The Chief Executive Officer Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Udaipur.
22. Dharam Pal Yadav S/o Sh. Banshi Dhar, R/o Dhani Afriya Ki, Village Shahpura, Post Khori Tehsil Shahpura District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
23. Hawa Singh S/o Sh. Mahipal Singh, R/o 409, Sanjay Nagar-D, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
24. Kamlesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Sh. Hanuman Prasad Kumawat, R/o 28, Bal Vihar Colony, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
25. Riddi Chand S/o Sh. Bheekam Chand, R/o Charu Sadan, C-Scheme, Karamchari Colony, Near Babu Lal Mill, Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
26. Ramratan Saini S/o Sh. Sohan Lal Saini, R/o 8, Nadi Ka Phatak, Benar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
27. Lalit Kumar Potar S/o Sh. Nemi Chand Potar, R/o V/p Dhulet, Tehsil Kanwas, District Kota, Rajasthan.
28. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand Gupta, R/o Near Saras Milk Dairy, Vp Mahukala Gangapur City District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
29. Kalpana Kumari D/o Sh. Pratap Singh Kumari, R/o Vpo Chatarpura, Tehsil Bansur District Alwar, Rajasthan.
30. Rajendra Singh S/o Sh. Hari Singh, R/o V/p Bhadira, Tehsil Nadbai District Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
31. Mukesh Prajapat S/o Sh. Babu Lal Prajapat, R/o Kumharo Ka Bass, Vpo Giri, Tehsil Raipur, Via Sendra, District Pali, Rajasthan.
32. Ram Vilas Sharma S/o Sh. Rewar Mal Sharma, R/o Chopra Dhani, 22 Meel, V/p Didwana, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Rajasthan.
33. Daleep Singh Yadav S/o Sh. Hari Singh Yadav, R/o Village Dhani Ohda, Post Devta, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
34. Sugan Singh S/o Sh Pratap Singh, R/o V/p Mesiya, Via Bar, Tehsil Raipur, District Pali, Rajasthan.
35. Seema Sain D/o Babu Lal Sain, R/o C-11, Alkapuri, (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (4 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] Murlipura Scheme District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
36. Vimal Saini S/o Sh Kishori Lal Saini, R/o V/p Sainipura, Dundlod, Tehsil Nawalgarh District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
37. Sunil Kumar Sharma S/o Govind Lal Sharma, R/o Plot No. 65, Shivaji Nagar Kampu District Tonk, Rajasthan.
38. Mayur Vashistha S/o Chandra Prakash Sharma, R/o Near Government Sr. Sec. School, District Tonk, Rajasthan.
39. Radha Krishan Verma S/o Sh. Chiman Lal Verma, R/o Vpo Beenjhbayala, Tehsil Padampur, District Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
40. Ramesh Kumar S/o Surat Singh, R/o V/p Dhani Dhabarwas, Tehsil Nimrana District Alwar, Rajasthan.
41. Bharat Lal Gurjar S/o Sh. Ragunath, R/o 64/248, Pratap Nagar Sheopur Road, Near Gulab Vihar, Sanganer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
42. Dataram Dhaker S/o Sh. Niranjan Lal, R/o Village Nagla Tirkha, Post Deheganwa, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
43. Sushila Bhat D/o Radheshyam Bhat, R/o Bhanpur Kalan Via Amer District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
44. Sunita Kumari D/o Sh. Mahavir Singh, R/o Village Ramsinghpura, Post Nangal Khorai, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar, Rajasthan.
45. Teekam Chand Sharma S/o Shri Ramesh Chandra Sharma, R/o Behind Devendra Electrical, Devpura District Bundi, Rajasthan.
46. Ravindra Singh S/o Sh. Sohan Singh, R/o V/p Bailara Tehsil Nadbai District Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
47. Chandra Kanta Choudhary D/o Madhav Lal Choudhary, R/o New Colony, Jalia Iind, District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
48. Ramesh Chandra S/o Sh. Ganpat Lal, R/o Ward No. 11, Ashok Nagar Hawa District Kota, Rajasthan.
49. Giriraj Arya S/o Chhitarmal Arya, R/o Village Nauragpura, Post Ramsinghpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
50. Manju Kumari D/o Sh. Bhagirath Singh, R/o Vpo Hetamsar, Post Nua Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
51. Gourav Jangid S/o Sh. Nand Lal, R/o Vp Balkasa, Tehsil K. (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (5 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] Patan District Bundi, Rajasthan.
52. Harish Chandra Patidar S/o Govind Lal Patidar, R/o Village Udaiya, Post Silohi Teshil Galiaykot, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
53. Swati Sharma D/o Shyam Lal Sharma, R/o P.no. 25 Parwati Colony, Ramnagar Ext. Sodala, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
54. Mukta Jain D/o Chandra Prakash Jain, R/o Gurunanak Colony District Bundi, Rajasthan.
55. Satyanarayan Prajapati S/o Bhanwar Lal Prajapati, R/o C-
11, Vivekanand Puram, Matunda Road, District Bundi, Rajasthan.
56. Jeevan Lal S/o Jugata Ram, R/o V/p Suracharanan, Via Dishala District Barmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 794/2017 Sumer Singh Jat S/o Nema Ram Jat, R/o - Village And Post - Panchota, Tehsil - Nawa, District - Nagaur, Rajasthan.
----Appellant Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Cum Commissioner Panchayati Raj, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer Cum Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Nagaur
----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 801/2017 Bhagirath Ram Kamar S/o Ganesh Das, R/o Village And Post- Shyamgarh, V.i.a.- Maroth, Tehsil- Nawa City, District- Nagaur
----Appellant Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Cum Commissioner Panchayati Raj, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer Cum Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Nagaur
----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 815/2017 Durga Singh S/o Madan Singh, R/o Village And Post - Lachhari, (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (6 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] Tehsil - Ladnu, District - Nagaur.
----Appellant Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Cum Commissioner Panchayati Raj, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer Cum Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Pratapgarh.
----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 816/2017 Suresh Kumar S/o Sh. Chimana Ram, R/o Village- Daipur, Post- Rajliya, Teh- Nawa, District- Nagaur, Raj.
----Appellant Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary Cum Commissioner Panchayati Raj, Rajasthan, Jaipur
2. The Chief Executive Officer Cum Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Nagaur
3. Devilal Rayal S/o Ganesh Ram, R/o- Village- Bhinchro Ka Bas, Post- Nalot, Tehsil- Nawal, District- Nagaur, Raj..
----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 826/2017 Rakesh Kumar Thalor, S/o Sh. Mohan Singh, R/o Village Narsara, Post - Banthod, Tehsile - Fatehpur, District Sikar Raj.
----Appellant Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Gove, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director Elementary Education, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer Elementary, Jalore.
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jalore.
----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah, Advocate with Mr. Rajaram Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Akshit Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Pukhraj Chawla, Advocate, and Mr. Harendra Nal. Advocate (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (7 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] Mr. Vinod Jhajharia, Advocate Mr. Sunil Kumar Swami, Advocate Mr. Naveen Dhuwan, Advocate Mr. Y. K. Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Dr. Ganesh Parihar, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Akhilesh Soni, Advocate HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 08/01/2020 Vide this order above mentioned appeals would be disposed of as they involve common questions of law and fact.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants had participated in the selection process for Teacher Grade-III (Level-I and II) in pursuance to the advertisement dated 24.02.2012. However, candidates who had scored less marks than the appellants were selected. During the pendency of the writ petition filed by the appellants, the results were revised on account of revision of answer keys. Consequently, the candidates who were lower in merit than the appellants could not make in the selection process on account of revised result. However, the said candidates were retained in service by the respondents in view of the directions given by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2014 in Ramdhan Kumawat V/s State of Rajasthan & another. The said decision of the learned Single Judge was upheld by the Division Bench. Learned counsel for the appellants have further submitted that a similar controversy arose before this Court in D.B. Special Appeal(Writ) No.1178/2017 titled as Rajesh Choudhary and others Versus State of Rajasthan and another along with other connected appeals and vide order dated 03.11.2017, it was ordered that the unfilled posts be treated as vacant posts and the same be filled up (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (8 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] in view of various directions issued in judicial verdicts reproduced and considered in the said order. Learned counsel has submitted that the similar directions be issued in this case as were issued vide order dated 03.11.2017.
Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the appeals.
Facts in the present case are not in dispute. Similar controversy involved in the present case had arisen before this Court in D. B. Special Appeal(Writ) No.1178/2017 and other connected appeals. The said appeals were disposed of vide order dated 03.11.2017 and the same has been placed on record as Annexure-9 along with the rejoinder filed by the appellants.
The relevant part of the order dated 03.11.2017 reads as under:-
"9) Orders impugned in the instant appeals have been passed by the learned Single Judge in light of the decision dated12/04/2017 directing that for the year 2011 only 1478 notified vacancies have to be filled up and that the respondents would carry out an exercise to determine as to how many candidates offered appointment pursuant to the first merit list prepared had accepted and joined.
Said candidates would not be disturbed. Their appointments would continue. Apart from 62 vacancies out of 1478 for which no letters offering appointment were issued, such additional vacancies which would be available on account of either candidate not accepting letter of offer or having accepted letter of offer had left service would be filled up.
10) Learned counsel for the appellants could not show any material to us as to the exact number of vacancies available out of 1478 which were notified for the year 2011 which remain to be filled up. Similarly, learned counsel for the respondents could also not throw any light on said aspect.
11) As regards the issue raised by the appellants that people lower in merit than (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (9 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] them in the revised merit list have been retained in service and thereby a vested right in the appellants who are higher in merit in the second select list, has been violated is concerned, in view of the decision in Umesh Singhal's case which is based on decision of the Supreme Court, the argument is rejected. Thus, of the 1478 notified vacancies such number have been occupied by candidates as per the merit position in the first select list notified on 21/07/2012 is concerned, the same cannot be upset. Such vacancies for said year which remain unfilled as of today, be it because of letters offering appointment not issued to all selected candidates when the merit list was prepared or on account of some of the candidates not accepting letter offering appointment or some having joined and resigned thereafter would require to be filled up in view of the various directions issued in judicial verdicts and as noted hereinabove.
12. Declaring as above, we dispose of the appeals directing the respondents to work out how many posts out of 1478 notified for the year 2011 remain unfilled as of today and by unfilled we mean those posts for which candidates who were offered appointment did not join or after joining resigned or left service. All of them would be treated as vacant posts. The exercise shall be completed within six weeks from today. Thereafter, the mandamus issued by the learned Single Judge in Umesh Singhal's case shall be complied with."
It was held by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.311/2014 titled as Umesh Singhal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others and other connected matters decided on 05.03.2014 as under:-
"Having regard to the ratio of aforesaid judgement in Rajesh Kumar, supra the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent- university to get the objections raised by the petitioners examined from experts, on receipt of the report, within one month from the date copy of this order is produced before them and forward the revised merit list to the State. The State Government on the basis of such revised list, shall offer appointment to such candidates, who newly figure in the (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) (10 of 10) [SAW-908/2017] merit list within the advertised number of posts i.e. 1478. The candidates already appointed against the vacant posts, may be continued in service by placing them below the candidates who are now in the revised merit placed higher than them in merit. The appointment of newly figure candidates in the merit shall relate back to the date when the appointments of the candidates was made on the basis of originally prepared merit list."
Since, the question involved in the present appeals is similar to the one dealt by this Court vide order dated 03.11.2017, we are of the considered opinion that the present appeals are liable to be disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court dated 03.11.2017. It has been pointed out during the course of arguments that the order dated 03.11.2017 has been duly complied by the State/respondents.
Accordingly, these appeals as well as all the applications moved by the intervenors stand disposed of directing the respondents to work out as to how many posts out of 41000 notified for the year 2012 recruitment remain unfilled as of today on account of the fact that the candidates who were offered appointment did not join or after joining resigned or left the service and all of them would be treated as vacant posts.
Thereafter, the mandamus issued by the learned Single Judge in Umesh Singhal's case shall be complied with. The entire exercise shall be completed within eight weeks from today by the respondents.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J (SABINA),J Jatin/Gourav/8-14 (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:54:10 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)