Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Deepak Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:48241) on 10 November, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:48241]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18167/2025
1. Deepak Kumar Sharma S/o Ashok Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o Ganesh Mohalla, VPO- Shakkargarh,
Tehsil Jahazpur, District Bhilwara (Raj.)
2. Sanjeeta Kumari Gurjar D/o Phool Singh, Aged About 31
Years, R/o VPO- Sikandra, Dhani Agali Kothi, District
Dausa (Raj.)
3. Om Prakash Bhambhi S/o Bansi Lal Bhambhi, Aged About
48 Years, R/o Village Chosala, Post Devpuri, Tehsil Arain,
District Ajmer (Raj.)
4. Shyam Sundar Lacchiya S/o Buggaram, Aged About 47
Years, R/o Village Geji, Post Padasoli, Tehsil Dudu, District
Jaipur (Raj.)
5. Amrit Lal Jatav S/o Bharosi Ram Jatav, Aged About 48
Years, R/o Village Badanpura, Post Kotri, Tehsil Hindaun,
District Karauli (Raj.)
6. Piyush Panchal S/o Dinesh Panchal, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Near Hada Rani Kund, Raibari Bada Ka Chowk,
Todaraisingh, District Tonk (Raj.)
7. Tejkaran S/o Badrilal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village
Chitawa, Post Sarola Kalan, Jhalawar, District Jhalawar
(Raj.)
8. Sanjay Kumar Sarowa S/o Ram Kumar Sarowa, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Village Basari, Post Dhanuri, District
Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
9. Sumer Singh Gurjar S/o Ramkaran Gurjar, Aged About 52
Years, R/o Village Singhpura, Post Bishanpura, Tehsil
Sainthal, District Dausa (Raj.)
10. Laxmi Narayan Meena S/o Ramsingh Meena, Aged About
49 Years, R/o Badoli, District Sawaimadhopur (Raj.)
11. Girdhari Lal Saini S/o Ramji Lal Saini, Aged About 48
Years, R/o 86, Maliyo Ka Mohalla, Peelwa, Titarwada
Kalan, District Dausa (Raj.)
12. Sukharam Meena S/o Chhotya Meena, Aged About 55
Years, R/o Nangal Mandal, Karauli, District Karauli (Raj.)
13. Ramkishor Meena S/o Lachhoo Ram Meena, Aged About
47 Years, R/o Guvada Saddaram, Ajabgarh, District Alwar
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 05:47:36 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 06:53:11 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:48241] (2 of 6) [CW-18167/2025]
(Raj.)
14. Shivraj Meena S/o Parmanand Meena, Aged About 52
Years, R/o Village Meena Basti, Kachra, Tehsil Atru,
District Baran (Raj.)
15. Baskari Kumari Bhalothia D/o Ramjilal, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Sanjay Nagar, Bhojasar, Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
16. Tarachand S/o Harlal Singh, Aged About 51 Years,
R/o Village Thethaliya, Sikar (Raj.)
17. Hanuman Singh Batar S/o Harlal Singh, Aged About 41
Years, R/o VPO- Bataranu, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District
Sikar (Raj.)
18. Mahendra Singh Rajput S/o Mansingh Rajput, Aged About
50 Years, R/o Ward No. 20, Sridungargarh, Bikaner (Raj.)
19. Neetu D/o Sohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No.
15, Singnor, Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
20. Subhita Kumari D/o Suresh Kumar, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Basant Bihar, Ward No. 04, Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
21. Lumbaram S/o Mangu Banjara, Aged About 48 Years,
R/o 41, Marubhat, Banjaro Ka Mohalla, Rewantpura,
Jaipur (Raj.)
22. Sukhveer Meena S/o Chhturbhuj, Aged About 47 Years,
R/o Nearby Mandir, Jarela, District Baran (Raj.)
23. Rupendra Singh Shaktawat S/o Harisingh Shaktawat,
Aged About 40 Years, R/o Kenpura, Gingla, Udaipur (Raj.)
24. Chothuram S/o Megharam, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Khokhrana, Ward No. 11, Lunkaransar, Bikaner (Raj.)
25. Dashrath Singh S/o Gopal Singh, Aged About 31 Years,
R/o Madho Singh Ki Dhani, Ketu Dhirpura, Ketu Kalan,
Jodhpur (Raj.)
26. Deepak Kumar S/o Natoram Lal, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o 36, New Colony, Sangari, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
27. Shanitanaram Leelar S/o Chanda Ram Leelar, Aged About
43 Years, R/o VPO- Loharki, Tehsil Pokran, District
Jaisalmer (Raj.)
28. Ramesh Kumar Jangir S/o Ramgopal Jangir, Aged About
37 Years, R/o VPO- Mangluta, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District
Sikar (Raj.)
29. Asha Kumari Sharma D/o Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Aged
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 05:47:36 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 06:53:11 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:48241] (3 of 6) [CW-18167/2025]
About 43 Years, R/o Himmatpura, Mansarkheri,
Ramsarpalawala, District Jaipur (Raj.)
30. Om Prakash S/o Mangi Lal, Aged About 50 Years,
R/o VPO- Kumhari, Via Basni, District Nagaur (Raj.)
31. Rakesh Kumar Parashar S/o Purushottam Parashar, Aged
About 47 Years, R/o 190, Near Govind Devji Temple, Vpo-
Rajmahal, Tehsil Deoli, District Tonk (Raj.)
32. Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Omprakash Sharma, Aged
About 43 Years, R/o VPO- Amargarh, Tehsil Jahajpur,
District Bhilwara (Raj.)
33. Indra Verma D/o Durgashankar, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o 104, Indra Colony, Railway Station, Malpura, District
Tonk (Raj.)
34. Saroj Kanwar D/o Guman Singh, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Ward No. 29, Sardarshahar, Churu (Raj.)
35. Heena Bano D/o Saleem Khan, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Aguna Mohalla, Ward No. 31, Churu (Raj.)
36. Urmila D/o Banwari Lal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward
No.9, Chak 3Dwm, Udwm, Tehsil Rawatsar, District
Hanumangarh (Raj.)
37. Jairam Gurjar S/o Ramjilal, Aged About 50 Years,
R/o VPO- Paniyala, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.)
38. Ramesh Kumar Yogi S/o Ramgi Lal Yogi, Aged About 52
Years, R/o Village Majari Kalan, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Kotputli- Behror (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary,
Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. Secretariat Jaipur.
2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Barmer.
3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Balotara.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Dholpur.
5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Churu.
6. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jodhpur.
7. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jaisalmer.
8. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bikaner.
9. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bhilwara.
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 05:47:36 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 06:53:11 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:48241] (4 of 6) [CW-18167/2025]
10. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Patodi,
District Balotara
11. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Barmer Rural,
District Barmer.
12. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Shiv, District
Barmer.
13. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Badi, District
Dholpur.
14. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sarmathura,
District Dholpur.
15. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Baseri,
District Dholpur.
16. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ratangarh,
District Churu.
17. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sardarshahar,
District Churu.
18. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Shergarh,
District Jodhpur.
19. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Denchu,
District Jodhpur.
20. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bhaniyana,
District Jaisalmer.
21. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Panchu,
District Bikaner.
22. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Jahajpur,
District Bhilwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.R. Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order 10/11/2025
1. Heard.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the facts of the present writ petition are similar to the facts in (Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 05:47:36 PM) (Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 06:53:11 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:48241] (5 of 6) [CW-18167/2025] Keshar Singh Chauhan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15624/2025, decided on 01.09.2025 by the co-
ordinate bench of this Court which, in turn, relied upon the decision of the Jaipur Bench of this Court in Nand Kishore Sharma & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12109/2018, decided on 18.07.2018.
3. The order dated 01.09.2025 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Keshar singh Chauhan's case (supra) reads as under:-
"1. Petition herein arises, inter alia, out of the action on the part of the respondents in not according the correct service and notional benefits to the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that qua the aforesaid grievance, the petitioner may be granted liberty to file a fresh representation before the competent authority and the same be decided by passing appropriate administrative orders, in accordance with law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies on order/judgment in Nand Kishore Sharma & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12109/2018, decided on 18.07.2018 at Jaipur Bench and submits that the respondents may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment.
4. Request seems to be fair.
5. Given the nature of order which is being passed, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents and, therefore, the requirement of (Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 05:47:36 PM) (Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 06:53:11 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:48241] (6 of 6) [CW-18167/2025] issuance of notice is dispensed with as no return is required to be filed by them.
6. In the aforesaid premise, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to file fresh representation, which shall be gone into by the competent authority and appropriate administrative order shall be passed in accordance with law.
7. Needless to say that the competent authority shall go through the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner as mentioned hereinabove and apply its independent mind on the applicability of the same before passing any order.
8. Needful be done as expeditiously as possible."
4. In light of the above, the present writ petition is also disposed of in the same terms as in Keshar Singh Chauhan's case (supra).
5. All the pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J 400s-PoonamS/-
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 05:47:36 PM) (Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 06:53:11 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)