Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rakesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2023/Rjjd/007834) on 28 March, 2023
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023/RJJD/007834]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3805/2023
1. Rakesh Kumar S/o Sahab Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Bijarniya Ka Mohala, Gram Panchayat Lalana Utrada,
District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
2. Bharat Singh S/o Data Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Village Mirzapur, Post Dhakpuri, Tehsil Malakhera, District
Alwar. Belt No. 11227.
3. Lakshman Singh S/o Lalchand, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Village And Post Gagwana, Tehsil Nadbai, District
Bharatpur. Belt No. 11322.
4. Ajay Singh S/o Manohar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Village Kakada, Post Bedham, Tehsil Deeg, District
Bharatpur. Belt No. 11318.
5. Manoj Kumar S/o Fool Singh Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/
o Village Tusari, Post Tikri, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar.
Belt No. 11203.
6. Neeraj Kumar S/o Phool Singh Jat, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Village Tusari, Post Tikri, Tehsil Kathumar, District
Alwar. Belt No. 11204.
7. Pramod Rajpoot S/o Ravindra Singh, Aged About 32
Years, R/o House No. 01, Rajpoot Mohlla Village
Chainpura, Post Dantia, Tehsil Kathumar, Distt-Alwar. Belt
No. 11213.
8. Pradhan Bana S/o Harkaran Bana, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Village And Post Dhandholi, Via Dudu, District Jaipur
303008 . Belt No. 11222.
9. Daulat S/o Seeto, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And
Post Dawak, Teh Nagar, District Bhartpur, Rajasthan. Belt
No. 11206.
10. Babalu Singh S/o Lokan Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Village Adn Post Chiksana, Tehsil And District Bharatpur.
Belt No. 11198.
11. Manoj Kumar Verma S/o Shri Chandra Shekhar Verma,
Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village And Post Jaishri, Tehsil
Sikri, District Bharatpur. Belt No 11270.
12. Ramesh Chand S/o Leela, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
Village Dhamari, Post Dhamari, Tehsil Deeg, District
Bharatpur. Belt No. 11387.
13. Abhay Singh S/o Chatar Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Village And Post Shishwada, Tehsil Deeg, District
Bharatpur. Belt No. 11380.
14. Dharmvir S/o Chatar Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Village Kheriya Gurjar, Post Didawali, Tehsil Deeg, District
Bharatpur. Belt No. 11197.
15. Tejvir Singh S/o Shri Balvir Singh, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Village Garhi Surajmal, Post Khandeha, District
Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh. Belt No. 11325
(Downloaded on 29/03/2023 at 11:58:27 PM)
[2023/RJJD/007834] (2 of 4) [CW-3805/2023]
16. Bhero Singh Verma S/o Chandra Shekhar Verma, Aged
About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Jaishri, Tehsil Nagar,
District Bharatpur. Belt No. 11269.
17. Surendra Singh S/o Gyan Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/
o Village Tilampur, Post Nawali, Post Nawali, Tehsil
Bayana, District Bharatpur. Belt No. 11166.
18. Natvar Singh S/o Vijendar Singh, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Village Raipur, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur. Belt No.
11175.
19. Balveer Singh Sekhawat S/o Narpat Singh, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Village And Post Barsinghpura, Tehsil
Dantaramgarh, District Sikar. Belt No. 11157.
20. Aran Singh S/o Manohari Gurjar, Aged About 30 Years, R/
o Village Bhagori, Post-Kanawar, Tehsil Bayana, District
Bharatpur. Belt No.11164.
21. Pawan Kumar Yadav S/o Surendra Singh Yadav, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Sardar Singh Ki Dhani, Aalmpur,
Bansur, District Alwar. Belt No.11161.
22. Ramesh Jat S/o Jairam Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Village Ramduttpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur. Belt
No. 11199.
23. Ajiram S/o Ramkhiladi Gurjar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Village Raipur, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur. Belt No.
11169.
24. Bhawani Khateek S/o Kajod Ram Khateek, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Village Agar, Post Agar, Tehsil Thanagazi,
District Alwar. Belt No. 11262
25. Rattiram Gurjar S/o Rampratap Gurjar, Aged About 29
Years, R/o Village Dhoun, Post Kutkya, Tehsil Lalsot,
District Dausa. Belt No. 11180.
26. Dinesh Chand Jatav S/o Ramsahay Jatav, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Village Chamanpura, Post Fulwadatahsil, Tehsil
Hindaun City, District Karauli. Belt No. 10806.
27. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Rameswar Meena, Aged About
29 Years, R/o Village And Post Mundia (Bada Ki Dhani ),
Tehsil- Newai, Distt- Tonk. Belt No. 11159.
28. Bhag Chand Meena S/o Rameshwar Meena, Aged About
30 Years, R/o Village And Post Mundia (Bada Ki Dhani),
Tehsil Newai, District Tonk. Belt No. 11160.
29. Mantram Singh S/o Shri Kishan, Aged About 34 Years, R/
o Village And Post Pipalkera, Tehsil Mahwa, District
Dausa. Belt No. 11150.
30. Mohan Lal Gurjar S/o Kailash Chand Gurjar, Aged About
36 Years, R/o V/p Bagdoli The. Bonli Disst. Sawai
Madhopur Pin 322023 Jaipur Commission Rate Belt
No.11158
31. Ravi Kumar S/o Shri Shivram Jatav, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Vpo, Katara Tehsil Nadbai, District Bhartpur, Belt No.
(Downloaded on 29/03/2023 at 11:58:27 PM)
[2023/RJJD/007834] (3 of 4) [CW-3805/2023]
10828.
32. Pradhan Choudhary S/o Baijanath Choudhary, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Village Ganwar, Tehsil Malapura District
Tonk (Raj.) Belt No. 11208.
33. Kanaram Jat S/o Badri Lal Jat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Village Kankniyaws, Post- Nalu Tah- Kishangarh District
Ajmer (Raj).
34. Kalu Ram Meena S/o Faily Ram Meena, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Vilaage Shree Jugpura Post Sunara The Newai
Tonk. Belt No.11299.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through its Home Secretary,
Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur
2. The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur.
3. Inspector General Of Police, Bharatpur Range, Bharatpur,
Rajasthan.
4. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur, Commisionarate Jaipur
(Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order 28/03/2023 It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment in Dara Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.11973/2012, decided on 17.12.2012.
In the case of Dara Singh (supra), a coordinate Bench of this Court, inter alia, directed as under:
"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that realizing the mistake, appointment has been given, thus, grievance of petitioner to the extent is redressed, but appointment should have been made effective from the date candidates lesser in merit were given appointment with notional benefits.(Downloaded on 29/03/2023 at 11:58:27 PM)
[2023/RJJD/007834] (4 of 4) [CW-3805/2023] In view of the prayer made and taking note of the order dated 13.12.2012 whereby petitioner is given appointment realizing mistake by the respondents, I consider it proper to direct that aforesaid appointment should be treated from the date when lesser meritorious candidates were given. The petitioner would, accordingly, be entitled to the notional benefits and seniority from the date persons with less merit were given appointment. The actual benefits would be allowed from the date of joining pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2012.
With the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of."
In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of with similar directions to the respondents No.3 & 4 as given in the case of Dara Singh (supra).
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 91-Shahenshah/-
(Downloaded on 29/03/2023 at 11:58:27 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)