Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Deepak Kumar Gupta S/O Shri Chouthmal ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 April, 2022
Author: Inderjeet Singh
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6232/2019
1. Deepak Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Chouthmal Gupta, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o Behind Choudhary Petrol Pump Tonk
Road, Sanganer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Aditya Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Jitendra Sharma, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o Brahampuri, Panchayat Samiti Road,
Dausa, Rajasthan.
3. Mitesh Srivastava S/o Shri Rajesh Chandra Srivastava,
Aged About 32 Years, R/o House No. 259/e, North
Humayupur, Shiv Saktipuram, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parshid, Sikar, Through Its Commissioner, Sikar
Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Parshid Dausa, Through Its Commissioner, Dausa,
Rajasthan.
5. Nagar Parshid Jhunjhunu, Through Its Commissioner,
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
Connected with
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20168/2019
Nisha Batra W/o Shri Sushil Batra, Aged About 46 Years,
Resident Of 7A, Main Road, Setia Colony, Sriganganagar,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director, Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(2 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
3. Nagar Parishad Sri Ganganagar Through Its
Commissioner, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6242/2019
1. Tejpal Singh S/o Shri Ishwar Singh, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Ward No. 5 Karni Nagar, V And P Mau, The. Shri
Madhopur, Dist. Sikar, Rajasthan.
2. Kaushal Kishor Sharma S/o Shri Mahesh Chand Sharma,
Aged About 39 Years, R/o D-537, Malviya Nagar 302017,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
3. Vijay Sharma S/o Shri Krishan Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o F-96, Rampath Shyam Nagar, Jaipur,
Rajasthan
4. Imran Khan S/o Shri Sarwar Khan, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o 112 Raghunath Puri Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Priyanka Pathak D/o Shri Lalit Kumar Pathak, Aged About
32 Years, R/o House No. 141, Nasiya Colony, Ward No.
17, Gangapur City, Dist. Sawai Madhapur,. Rajasthan.
6. Ramendra Kumar Sharma D/o Shri Dinesh Kumar
Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Near No. 2 School,
Chuli Gate, Gangapur City, Dist. Sawai Madahpur,
Rajasthan.
7. Manglaram Jat S/o Shri Suvalal Jat, Aged About 53 Years,
R/o Village Aamipura, Post Khandel Via Sambar Lake Dist.
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
8. Dinesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Om Prakash Sharma,
Aged About 42 Years, R/o 96, Shriji Nagar, Durgapura,
Jaipur 302018, Rajasthan.
9. Mahesh Kumar Gahan S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Gahan, Aged
About 43 Years, R/o Near Shishu Mandir School, Ward No.
14, Teh. Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu. 96, Shriji Nagar,
Durgapura, Jaipur 302018, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(3 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
3. Nagar Parshid, Sikar, Through Its Commissioner, Sikar
Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Parshid Tonk, Through Its Commissioner, Tonk
Rajasthan.
5. Nagar Parshid Dausa, Through Its Commissioner, Dausa,
Rajasthan.
6. Nagar Parshid Jaisalmer, Through Its Commissioner,
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
7. Nagar Parshid Sawai Madhopur, Through Its
Commissioner, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
8. Nagar Parshid Jhunjhunu, Through Its Commissioner,
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6957/2019
1. Rajesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Hari Prasad Sharma, Aged
About 39 Years, By Caste- Brahamin, R/o Dhani Dhabali,
Post Labana Via Achrol, District- Jaipur.
2. Brij Kishor S/o Shri Nanak Chand, Aged About 39 Years,
By Caste- Dholi, R/o Near Ambedkar Circle, Dausa-
303303, Rajasthan.
3. Vikas Samar S/o M.l. Luhar, Aged About 41 Years, By
Caste- Lohar, R/o C-21, Akshar Dham Colony, Borkheda,
Kota, Rajasthan.
4. Manish Nama S/o Shri Kishore Nama, Aged About 36
Years, By Caste- Chippa (Nama), R/o 2/37, Housing
Board Colony, Tonk, Rajasthan.
5. Mahaveer Singh S/o Shri Madan Singh, Aged About 34
Years, By Caste- Charan, R/o A-193, Karni Path, Tara
Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
6. Nirmal Kumar S/o Shri Sitaram, Aged About 28 Years, By
Caste- Jatav, R/o Daru Kutta Mohalla, Gali No. 5, Alwar-
301001
7. Sheel Kant S/o Shri D.k. Sharma, Aged About 32 Years,
By Caste- Brahamin, R/o C-213/74A, Janak Puri, New
Delhi.
8. Laxmi Narayan S/o Shri Chandra Mohan, Aged About 52
Years, By Caste- Dhanka, R/o 127, Vivek Vihar, New
Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
9. Aashish Upadhaye S/o M.l. Sharma, Aged About 27 Years,
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(4 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
By Caste- Brahamin, R/o 2/183 Near Shiv Mandi,r
Nimbark Colony, Vardaman Nagar, Hinduan City, Karauli,
Rajasthan-322230.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Local Self Government, Rajasthan, Having Its Office At G-
3, Rajmahal Residency, Near Civil Line Railway Crossing,
Jaipur-302005, Rajasthan.
2. Directorate Of Local Bodies, Rajasthan, Through Its
Director Cum Mission Director, Having Its Registered
Office At G-3, Rajmahal Residency, Near Civil Line Railway
Crossing, Jaipur-302005, Rajasthan.
3. Project Director, Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana- National
Urban Livelihood Mission, In Directorate Of Local Bodies,
Rajasthan, Having Its Registered Office At G-3, Rajmahal
Residency, Near Civil Line Railway Crossing, Jaipur-
302005, Rajasthan.
4. The H.r. Manager, T And M Services Consulting Private
Limited, J-35, Krishna Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7114/2019
1. Divya Upadhyay D/o Shri Brijesh Kumar Upadhyay, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Murti Mohalla, Gangapur City, Sawai
Madhopur, Rajasthan.
2. Yash Malhotra S/o Shri Sunil Malhotra, Aged About 27
Years, R/o A-128, Gaytri Nagar-A, Maharani Farm,
Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Chaitany Sharma S/o Shri Bhagwan Lal Sharma, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Old Nakoda Colony, Baran,
Rajasthan.
4. Satya Narayan Nagar S/o Shri Ram Pratap Nagar Sharma,
Aged About 41 Years, R/o Jain Colony, Baran Dist. Baran,
Rajasthan.
5. Ankit Mathur S/o Shri Banwari Lal Mathur, Aged About 30
Years, Gota Colony, Fateh Sagar Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan.
6. Devendra Singh Ranawat S/o Shri Madan Singh Ranawat,
Aged About 36 Years, R/o Naya Rawla, Sanderao, Teh.
Sumerpur, Dist. Pali, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(5 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
7. Rajeev Purohit S/o Shri Subhash Purohit, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Behind Old Post Office, Pratap Bazar, Dist. Pali,
Rajasthan.
8. Ajay Verma S/o Shri Ashok Verma, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Ward No. 35, Churu, Dist. Churu, Rajasthan.
9. Parikshit Jain D/o Shri Paras Kumar Jain, Aged About 42
Years, R/o 1-H-15, Old Housing Board, Shastri Nagar,
Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
10. Mohan Lal S/o Shri Kashi Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Ward No. 22, Naya Bas, Near Sujangarh, Churu,
Rajasthan.
11. Surendra Singh S/o Shri Aidan Singh Charan, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Near Silampuria, Sardar Sahar,
Churu, Rajasthan.
12. Surendra Singh S/o Shri Prahald Singh Tanwar, Aged
About 44 Years, R/o New Khunja, Ward No. 4, Behind
Pulkit School, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
13. Om Prakash Kaswan S/o Shri Shisupal Kaswan, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 21, Gandhi Colony, Churu,
Rajasthan.
14. Ajay Shekhawat S/o Shri Sajjan Singh, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Ward No. 23, Behind Babosa Murti, Bisau
Road, Churu, Rajasthan.
15. Lalit Kumar Lodha S/o Shri Shankar Lal Lodha, Aged
About 50 Years, R/o Ramesh Sharma, Bhado Ka Vass,
Pangarh Road, Shiv Mandir Road, Barmer, Rajasthan.
16. Vijay Rai Mathur S/o Shri Mukesh Rai, Aged About 35
Years, R/o 17/e/820, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parishad Dholpur, Through Its Commissioner,
Dholpur, Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Parishad Sawai Madhopur, Through Its
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(6 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Commissioner, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
5. Nagar Parishad Barmer, Through Its Commissioner,
Barmer, Rajasthan.
6. Nagar Parishad Baran, Through Its Commissioner, Baran,
Rajasthan.
7. Nagar Parishad Churu, Through Its Commissioner, Churu,
Rajasthan.
8. Nagar Parishad Bhilwara, Through Its Commissioner,
Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
9. Nagar Parishad Hanumangarh, Through Its Commissioner,
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
10. Nagar Parishad Sriganganagar, Through Its Commissioner,
Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.
11. Nagar Parishad Sujangarh, Dist. Churu Through Its
Commissioner, Sujangarh, Dist. Churu Rajasthan.
12. Nagar Parishad Jaisalmer, Through Its Commissioner,
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
13. Nagar Parishad Pali, Through Its Commissioner, Pali,
Rajasthan.
14. Director, T And M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd., T And M
House, Kohinoor Complex, A Wing, Next To Maharaja
Hotel, Dahisar, Mumbai.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7173/2019
Ashwani Kumar S/o Shri Prahalad Rai Gomlada, Aged About 37
Years, R/o D-79, Pragati Path, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary,
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Directorate
Of Local Bodies, Jaipur, Government Of Rajasthan, G-3,
Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines
Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Director, T And M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd., T And M
House, Kohinoor Complex, A Wing, Next To Maharaja
Hotel, Dahisar, Mumbai.
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(7 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13324/2019
1. Vikash Dhaka S/o Shri Shiv Lal Dhaka, Aged About 27
Years, R/o- Village- Basni, Post- Bairas, Teh.-
Laxmangarh, Distt.- Sikar (Raj.)
2. Mustaq Ali S/o Shri Mohammad Husain, Aged About 31
Years, R/o - Bhudoli, Neem Ka Thana, Distt.- Sikar (Raj.)
3. Pradeep Kumar Meena S/o Shri Mahavir Prasad Meena,
Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Post Dahla, Teh. - Neem
Ka Thana, Distt.- Sikar (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary,
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur
(Raj.)
2. Director, Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan Cum State Mission Director, National Urban
Livelihood Mission ( Nulm), G-3, Rajmahal Residential
Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur-16 (Raj.)
3. Nagar Palika Through Its Executive Officer, Fatehpur
Shekhawati, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
4. Nagar Palika Through Its Executive Officer, Khandela,
Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
5. Nagar Palika Through Its Executive Officer, Lossal, Distt.
Sikar (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17292/2019
Ashish Sharma S/o Shri Om Prakash Sharma, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Basant Vihar Colony, Ward No. 19, Jaipur Road,
Chomu Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur
(Raj.)
2. Director, Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan Cum State Mission Director, National Urban
Livelihood Mission (Nulm), G-3, Rajmahal Residential
Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur-16 (Raj.)
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(8 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
3. Nagar Parishad, Through Its Executive Officer, Sikar (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17544/2019
1. Manmohan Sharma S/o Shri Deepak Kumar Sharma,
Aged About 36 Years, R/o A-10, Ashok Vihar, Behind
Babul Paradise Garden, New Sanganer Road, Mansarovar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Ahmad Tahreen Siddiqui S/o Mohd. Maseean Siddiqui,
Aged About 41 Years, R/o Flat No. F1, Ashray Nilay,
Govind Vihar, Gandhi Path West, Lalerpura, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
3. Nitin Pareek S/o Shri Mahesh Kumar Pareek, Aged About
34 Years, R/o 19, Krishna Vihar-A, New Saganer Road,
Opposite Heerapath, Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Bhanwar Khan S/o Shri Allara Khan, Aged About 46
Years, R/o Khariya, Meethapur, Bilara, Dist. Jodhpur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Directorate
Of Local Bodies, Jaipur, Government Of Rajasthan, G-3,
Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines
Phatak, Jaipur, 16 Rajasthan.
3. Director, T And M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd. T And M
House, Kohinoor Complex, A Wing, Next To Maharaja
Hotel, Dahisar, Mumbai.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17575/2019
1. Ghanshyam Bairwa S/o Shri Jangli Ram Bairwa, Aged
About 43 Years, R/o Village Islampura, Post Soran, Tehsil
And District Tonk, Rajasthan.
2. Sunil Yadav S/o Shri Shvi Ram Yadav, Aged About 34
Years, R/o 29 Ganesh Nagar, Patrakar Colony Road,
Mansarovar Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Hanuman Sahay Sharma S/o Shri Rameswar Lal Sharma,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o Dhani Dhabali, Village Ani, Post
Lubana, Via Achrol, Tehsil Amer, Jaipur Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(9 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
4. Malini Stanley D/o Shri Stanis Laus Kamal, Aged About 33
Years, R/o 850/26 Near St. Joseph Church Parbathpura,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
5. Navin Kaushik S/o Shri Om Prakash Sharma, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Basant Vihar, Ward No. 19, Near Daulat
Shah Baba Ki Dargah, Jaipur Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
6. Sohan Lal S/o Shri Heeraram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o V
And P Gadra Road, Tehsil Gadra, Dist. Barmer. Rajasthan.
7. Adil Rashid S/o Shri Abu Zafar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
Flat No. F1, Ashray, Govind Vihar, Gandhi Path, Lalarpura,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
8. Obedulla Khan S/o Shri Barkatulla Khan, Aged About 39
Years, R/o House No. 109 Friends Colony, Grameen Police
Line, Borkhera, Kota, Rajasthan.
9. Om Singh S/o Shri Madan Singh, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Village Post Chandwas, Tehsil Sojat City, District Pali,
Rajasthan.
10. Lata Joshi D/o Narayan Lal Joshi, Aged About 42 Years,
R/o Sanchi Group Complex, Gahr Angan, Flat No. , B-
Tower, Kaladwas, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
11. Bhanupratap Singh Deora S/o Rajendra Singh Deora,
Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Post Mandwara, District
Sirohi, Rajasthan.
12. Ajay Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Pool Chand Gupta, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o 20A, Jawahar Colony, Ward No 18,
Jhalawar, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
13. Ratan Singh Rathore S/o Shri Sumer Singh Rathore, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o 27 Hastinapur Colony, Karni Palace
Road, Panchyawala, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parshid Tonk, Through Its Commissioner, Tonk
Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Parshid Jaipur, Through Its Commissioner,
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(10 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Jaipurrajasthan.
5. Nagar Parshid Sirohi, Through Its Commissioner, Sirohi
Rajasthan.
6. Nagar Parshid Jalore, Through Its Commissioner, Jalore,
Rajasthan.
7. Nagar Parshid Balotara, Through Its Commissioner,
Balotra, District Barmer, Rajasthan.
8. Nagar Parshid Bhilwara, Through Its Commissioner,
Bhilwara Rajasthan.
9. Nagar Parshid Rajsamand, Through Its Commissioner,
Rajsamand Rajasthan.
10. Nagar Parshid Udaipur, Through Its Commissioner,
Udaipur, Rajasthan.
11. Nagar Parshid Jhalawar, Through Its Commissioner,
Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17582/2019
1. Rakesh Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Badri Lal Jat, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Village And Post Khlniya Tehsil
Uniara, District Tonk, Rajasthan.
2. Mohit Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Suresh Chandra Sharma,
Aged About 24 Years, R/o Near Mandwara Railway
Crossing, Shiv Colony, Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan.
3. Sitaram Sharma S/o Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Murti Mohalla, Ward No. 40, Gangapur City,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parishad Tonk, Through Its Commissioner, Tonk,
Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Parishad Gangapur City, Through Its Commissioner,
Gangapur City, Rajasthan.
5. Director, T And M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd., T And M
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(11 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
House, Kohinoor Complex, A Wing, Next To Maharaja
Hotel, Dahisar, Mumbai.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17913/2019
Ashok Kumar Khatik S/o Shri Devi Lal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Chabri Chowk, Shanti Nagar, Alanpur, Sawai Madhopur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parishad, Sawai Madhopur, Through Its
Commissioner, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17959/2019
Dilip Kumar Tiwari S/o Shri Shiv Shankar Tiwari, Aged About 32
Years, R/o 29 Saket Nagar Vistar, Ward No. 19, Near Kanchan
City, Jhalawar Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Selfgovernment, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parishad Jhalawar, Through Its Commissioner,
Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
4. Director, T And M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd., T And M
House, Kohinoor Complex, A Wing, Next To Maharaja
Hotel, Dahisar, Mumbai.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19582/2019
1. Aakanksha Mishra D/o Shri Sitaram Mishra, Shiv Shankar
Tiwari, Aged About 32 Years, R/o D-133, Dev Nagar,
Murlipura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(12 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
2. Surendra Bangar S/o Shri Ram Gopal Bangar, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Shiv Mandir Wali Gali, Police Line, Loha
Khan, Ajmer. Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Nigam Jaipur, Through Its Commissioner, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Nigam Ajmer, Through Its Commissioner, Ajmer,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20292/2019
Mukut Bihari Sharma Son Of Shri Laxmi Narayan Sharma, Aged
About 31 Years, Resident Of Ganesh Mandir, 21, Sumer
Nagar,ajmer Road, Madanganj, Kishangarh, Ajmer (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principle Secretary,
Local Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad Kishangarh, District Ajmer
(Raj.)
4. Secretary, Ministry Of Housing And Urban Poverty
Alleviation, Secretariat, Delhi Govt. Of India.
5. Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Ajmer (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20381/2019
1. Shiv Pratap Singh Rajawat Son Of Shri Raghuveer Singh
Rajawat, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of 13, Shivaji
Nagar, Kampu, Tonk (Raj.)
2. Harsh Vardhan Singh Son Of Shri Vijay Pratap Singh,
Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of 73/38, Shipra Path,
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(13 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Ashish Malviya Son Of Shri Suresh Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 31 Years, Resident Of 104/38, Kumbha Marg,
Pratap Nagar, Sector-11, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principle Secretary,
Local Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Bharatpur (Raj.)
4. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Banswar (Raj.)
5. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Churu (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20675/2019
Soman Mendiratta D/o Shri N.k. Mendiratta, Aged About 31
Years, R/o B-10-E, Govind Marg, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Pahtak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21455/2019
1. Arif Ansari S/o Shri Mobin Ansari, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o H. No. 51, Prem Nagar, Purani Chungi, Ajmer Road,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Manish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad
Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Central Bank Ke Uper
Puroshotam Market, Narainpur Tehsil Thanagazi, Dist.
Alwar, Rajasthan.
3. Sandeep Joshi S/o Shri Satyanarayan Josh, Aged About
39 Years, R/o A-30 Shreenath Residency Behind
Maheshwari Resort, Bundi Road, Kota Rajasthan.
4. Neelam D/o Shri Kalyan Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(14 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
144, Shiv Shakti Vihar, Benar Road, Near Benar Railway
Station, Jotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Mohammed Iqbal S/o Shri Mohammed Maqbul Khan,
Aged About 48 Years, R/o Ravan Ki Dungri, Luharo Ka
Mohalla Bambor Gate, Tonk, Rajasthan.
6. Manish Agarwal S/o Shri Radhe Shyam Agarwal, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o S-6, Krishna Marg, Bapu Nagar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
7. Govind Singh Meena S/o Shri Banarsi Lal, Aged About 42
Years, R/o 23 Krishna Nagar, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
8. Danish Siddiqui S/o Shri Abdul Latif, Aged About 37
Years, R/o 59 Behind Maharaja Bheem Singhs Haveli,
Nala Mohalla Near Devnarayan Temple Dist. Jhalawar,
Rajasthan
9. Parveen Sharma S/o Shri Radharaman Sharma, Aged
About 47 Years, R/o 4-D-20 Rang Badi Yojana, Kota,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parishad, Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan,
Through Its Commissioner.
4. Nagar Nigam Kota, Rajasthan Through Its Commissioner.
5. Nagar Parishad Kishangarh, District Ajmer, Through Its
Commissioner.
6. Nagar Parishad Tonk, Rajasthan Through Its
Commissioner.
7. Jaipur Nagar Nigam, Through Its Commissioner Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
8. Nagar Parishad Karauli, Rajasthan Through Its
Commissioner.
9. Nagar Parishad Bundi, Rajasthan Through Its
Commissioner.
10. Nagar Parishad Makrana, Nagaur Rajasthan, Through Its
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(15 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Commissioner.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21482/2019
1. Rakesh Kumar Gurjar S/o Shri Babulal Gurjar, Aged About
22 Years, R/o Village Heensla, Thanagazi, Alwar,
Rajasthan.
2. Pramod Kumar Meena S/o Shri Satyanarayan Meena,
Aged About 25 Years, R/o Mandri, Thanagazi, District
Alwar, Rajasthan.
3. Anup Meena S/o Shri Trilok Chand Meena, Aged About 23
Years, R/o Village Heensla, Thanagazi, Alwar, Rajasthan.
4. Bihari Lal Meena S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal Meena, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Srimadhopur, Sikar,
Rajasthan.
5. Pankaj Meena S/o Hari Singh Meena, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Mahmadpur, Bebekhar, Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
6. Sayed Mohammed Swaleh S/o Shri Sayed Rahat Husain,
Aged About 26 Years, R/o Sadar Gali, Chatikna, District
Karouli, Rajasthan
7. Aditya Meena S/o Shri Kailash Chand Meena, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Village Hinsala, Post Saleta, Tehasil
Thanagaji, District Alwar, Rajasthan.
8. Rajesh Meena S/o Shri Surajmal Meena, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Ward No-43, Kumharo Ka Mohalla, Prem
Nagar_Ii, Udhyogpuri, Kota, Rajasthan.
9. Priyanka Meena D/o Parmanand Meena, Aged About 24
Years, R/o Near Hanuman Temple, House No. 1-A-16,
Sanjay Nagar B, Kota, Rajasthan.
10. Manish Kumar Swarnkar S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Swarnkar,
Aged About 32 Years, R/o Near Govt. Hospital, Sunar
Gali, Ward No. 21, Gangapurcity, District Swaimadhopur,
Rajasthan.
11. Dhuli Ram Meena S/o Shri Ram Karen Meena, Aged About
45 Years, R/o Plot No. 198, Ram Nagar Vistar, Sodala,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
12. Vaibhav Meena S/o Shri Mahendra Kumar Meena, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o 93 Krishna Nagar, Sirsi Road, Vaishali
Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
13. Alku Devi W/o Shri Sunil Dable, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(16 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Ward No. 14, Rajputo Ka Mohalla, Shahpura, District
Jaipur, Rajasthan
14. Sangita Sharma W/o Shri Sachin Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 28 Years, R/o Kaila Colony, Dholpur, Rajasthan.
15. Sashikant Tank S/o Shri Bhagwan Das Tank, Aged About
24 Years, R/o Kherli, Tehsil Kathumar, Dist. Alwar,
Rajasthan.
16. Meenakshi Mishra D/o Shri Mithilesh Mishra, Aged About
22 Years, R/o Vpo Thanagazi, Tehsil Rajgarh, Dist. Alwar,
Rajasthan.
17. Avid Khan S/o Shri Nadim Khan, Aged About 21 Years,
R/o Village Bijlehara, Post Bilaspur, Tehsil Tijara, Dist.
Alwar, Rajasthan.
18. Samiulla Khan S/o Shri Hamidulla Khan, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Ward No. 17, Kiro Ke Mandir Ke Pas, Karbal,
Ladpura, Kota Rajasthan.
19. Vinod Kumar Saini S/o Shri Prakash Chand Saini, Aged
About 27 Years, R/o Dhani Guner Ki, Nanu Wali Bawri,
Tehsil Ketri, Dist. Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
20. Arti Shekhawat D/o Shri Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o 6-J-25, Mahaveer Nagar Vitar Yojana,
Dadabadi, Kota Rajasthan.
21. Lovely Shekhawat D/o Shri Rajendra Singh Shekhawat,
Aged About 30 Years, R/o 6-J-25, Mahaveer Nagar Vitar
Yojana, Dadabadi, Kota Rajasthan.
22. Namita Shekhawat D/o Shri Rajendra Singh Shekhawat,
Aged About 28 Years, R/o 6-J-25, Mahaveer Nagar Vitar
Yojana, Dadabadi, Kota Rajasthan.
23. Deepak Dhakad S/o Shri Mantu Ram Dhakad, Aged About
23 Years, R/o Village Gothra, Post Lakhanpur, Tehsil Weir,
Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
24. Dilshad Ali S/o Shri Fariyad Ali, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Purani Tehsil Ke Piche Gurunanak Colony, Bundi,
Rajasthan.
25. Farzana W/o Shri Arif Hussain, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
3Ra, 23, Gandhi Garha Vigayan Nagar, Kota, Rajasthan.
26. Vishanswarooop S/o Shri Amar Singh, Aged About 22
Years, R/o Nidhera Khurd, Post Nidhera Kalan, Tahsil
Saipau, Dist Dholpur, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(17 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
27. Brijesh Sain S/o Shri Rajendra Sain, Aged About 23
Years, R/o Bajrang Basti, Kihorpura, Kota, Rajasthan.
28. Pooja Kumari D/o Shri Chothmal, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o House No. 32, Santoshi Nagar, Kota, Rajasthan.
29. Meenakshi Sindel D/o Shri Ramesh Sindel, Aged About 27
Years, R/o House No. 3E-17, Mahaveer Nagar Extension,
Kota (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director Local Self Government Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme,
Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur 16 Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Palika Karauli, Through Its Commissioner, Karauli,
Rajasthan
4. Nagar Palika Reengus, Through Its Commissioner, Sikar,
Rajasthan.
5. Nagar Palika Shrimadhopur, Through Its Commissioner,
Sikar, Rajasthan
6. Nagar Parishad Udaypurwati, Through Its Commissioner,
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
7. Nagar Nigam, Jaipur, Through Its Commissioner, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
8. Nagar Parishad Karouli, Rajasthan Through Its
Commissioner
9. Nagar Palika Virat Nagar, District Jaipur, Rajasthan,
Through Its Commissioner.
10. Nagar Nigam Kota, Rajasthan Through Its Commissioner.
11. Nagar Palika Shahpur, District Jaipur, Through
Commissioner.
12. Nagar Parishad Dholpur, Rajasthan, Through Its
Commissioner.
13. Nagar Palika Kherli, Alwar, Rajasthan, Through Its
Commissioner.
14. Nagar Palika Rajgarh, Alwar, Rajasthan, Through Its
Commissioner.
15. Nagar Palika Tijara, Alwar, Rajasthan, Through Its
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(18 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Commissioner.
16. Nagar Nigam Kota, Rajasthan, Through Its Commissioner.
17. Nagar Palika Laxmangarh, Sikar, Rajasthan, Through Its
Commissioner.
18. Nagar Palika Itawa, Kota, Rajasthan, Through Its
Commissioner.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21603/2019
Yatendra Sharma S/o Nemi Chand, Aged About 38 Years,
Resident Of 554 Panchayat Ghar Ke Pass,rupbas,bharatpur
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissoner, Nagar Parisad,dholpur (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21604/2019
Avadhesh Meena S/o Shree Govind Lal Patel, Aged About 37
Years, By Caste Meena Resident Bhawan Nimoda Bamori Kalan
Baran District Baran (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissoner, Nagar Parisad, Baran (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21618/2019
Dr.monika Soni D/o Pawan Kumar Soni, Aged About 35 Years, By
Caste Soni, Resident Of Radha Krishna Mandir Street No.2,
Dadwara,kota (Rajasthan).
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(19 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissoner, Nagar Parisad, Bundi (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21700/2019
Jairam Meena Son Of Shri Panchu Ram Meena, Aged About 48
Years, By Caste Meena, Resident Of Kyara, Suratgarh, District
Alwar (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principle Secretary,
Local Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21706/2019
1. Jogendra Singh Son Of Shri Patiram, Aged About 32
Years, By Caste Meena, Resident Of Village Hansai,
Dholpur (Raj.)
2. Prashant Kumar Son Of Shri Rajkumar Sharma, Aged
About 27 Years, Resident Of Opposite Gandhi Park,
Roopbas, District Bharatpur (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of
Housing And Urban Poverty Alleviation, Secretariat, Delhi
Govt. Of India
2. Principle Secretary, Local Self Government Department,
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(20 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
4. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Dholpur (Raj.)
5. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Badi, District Dholpur
(Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12/2020
Sourabh Kumar Gupta Son Of Radha Mohan Gupta, Aged About
29 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 19 Basant Vihar Jaipur Road,
Chomu, Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principle Secretary,
Local Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Parisad, Beawar, Ajmer (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1068/2020
Neeraj Saiwal Son Of Narain Swaroop Saiwal, Aged About 38
Years, Resident Of Lal Kothi,naya Bas,alwar District Alwar
(Rajasthan.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principle Secretary,
Local Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Parisad, Beawar, Ajmer(Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1085/2020
1. Prahlad Singh Rawat Son Of Shri Poonam Singh, Aged
About 27 Years, Resident Of Lodha Colony,asarava
Colony,ward No.36, Udaipur Road, Beawar, Ajmer
Rajasthan.
2. Ashok Kumar Sen Son Of Shri Rampal Sen, Aged About
26 Years, Resident Of Manoharpura, Bhilwara (Raj.)
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(21 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
3. Taruna Sharma Daughter Of Surya Prakash Sharma, Aged
About 28 Years, Resident Of Mishro Ka Mohalla, Choti
Basti, Phuskar Rural,ajmer Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Parisad, Beawar (Raj.)
4. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Sarwad, Ajmer, District
Ajmer (Raj.)
5. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Phuskar, Ajmer, District
Ajmer (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1086/2020
1. Mayaram Gurjar Son Of Banwari Lal, Aged About 24
Years, Resident Of Sundarpura, Jhotwara, Jaipur
Rajasthan.
2. Govind Mali Son Of Bhag Chand Mali, Aged About 27
Years, Resident Of 1-C-22 Kanchan Villa Housing, Board
Colony Gulabpura, Bhilwara (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Nashirabad, Ajmer (Raj.)
4. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Vijaynagar Ajmer,(Raj)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2149/2020
1. Pawan Sharma Son Of Gopal Krishn Sharma, Aged About
36 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 87 Karshni Sudama
Kutir,tilak Nagar Senthi, Chittorgarh Rajasthan.
2. Mukesh Meena Son Of Shyam Swarup, Aged About 23
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(22 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Years, Resident Of Ward No.10,malliyo Ka Mohalla,
Kawalda, Kota (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Asind, Bhilwara (Raj.)
4. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Chhabra Baran (Raj)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 234/2021
Pooja Jindal D/o Rajesh Kumar Jindal, Aged About 28 Years,
Resident Of Krishna Nand Bazaar, Near By Old Nagar Palika
Badrinath Bazaar, Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan,
Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bundi (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saurabh Tiwari
Mr. Himanshu Jain
Mr. Ankit Bishnoi
Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta
Mr. Rajesh Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG assisted by
Mr. Mehul Harkawat
Ms. Archana
Mr. Yashodhar Pandey
Mr. Abhishek Paliwal
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Saini
Mr. Rahul Sharma on behalf of
Mr. Rajneesh Gupta
Mr. Brij Kishore Sharma
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(23 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
Ms. Nitika Sud
Mr. Ritwick Dave
Mr. Shyogi Ram Sharma
Mr. Shyogi Ram, Adv. on behalf of
Mr. Lokesh Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Reportable Order
06/04/2022
1. Since identical questions of facts and law are involved in
these petitions, therefore with consent of the parties, these writ
petitions have been heard finally and are being decided by the
present order.
2. On the request made by the parties, the facts have been
noticed from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6232/2019 and the prayer
made therein reads as under:-
"It is, therefore, humbly and most
respectfully prayed that your lordships may
very graciously be pleased to admit and
allow this Civil Writ Petition and further;
i. By issuing appropriate writ order or
direction, Respondents may be restrained
from terminating the services of the
petitioners from the post in question and
they may further be restrained from
replacing the petitioners from another set
of contractual employees in DAY-NULUM
scheme till the currency of the project.
ii. By issuing appropriate writ order or
direction, the respondents may be directed
to strictly adhere with the operational
guidelines issued by the government of
India in respect of DAY-NULM project and
accordingly respondents may be directed
to extend the benefits as mentioned in the
operation guidelines.
iii. By issuing appropriate writ order or
direction, the order dated 08.03.2019 may
be quashed and set aside and respondents
may be directed to engage the petitioners
directly on the post in question.
iv. That any other order or direction as this
Hon'ble High Court may deem fair, just and
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(24 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
proper in the facts and circumstances of
the case may be passed in favour of the
Petitioner."
3. Brief facts of the case are that the Government of India
introduced a scheme namely DEENDAYALANTYODAYAYOJNA-
NATIONAL URBAN LIVELIHOOD MISSION (DAY-NULM)
(hereinafter to be referred as the "Scheme") for the purpose of
reducing poverty & vulnerability of the urban poor households by
enabling them to get the gainful self employment and skilled wage
employment opportunities, ultimately resulting in appreciable
improvement in their livelihoods on sustainable basis through
building grass route level institutions of the poor by tendering
process. The scheme started in the year 2014-2015 and has been
decided to be funded 60% by the Central Government and 40%
by the State Government. Implementing the said scheme in the
State of Rajasthan, the respondents invited bids from the
placement agencies to provide manpower of various posts. In the
case of the petitioners, the placement agency namely T & M
Services Consulting Private Limited Mumbai (hereinafter to be
referred as the "placement agency") was engaged by the
respondents for providing manpower at the State Level as well as
at the District Level. The said placement agency issued the
advertisement for hiring the persons on various posts i.e. State
Manager, District Manager and Community Organizer, on contract
basis. The petitioners pursuant to the advertisement issued by the
placement agency applied for appointment on the respective posts
and after consideration, the petitioners were given offer of
appointment on the respective posts by the placement agency.
Initially, the process was started in the year 2015 and the
petitioners were engaged on contract basis on the respective posts
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(25 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
by the placement agency initially for a period of one year and their
term on contract basis was extended further from time to time. It
has also come on record that taking into consideration the
achievement of 100% of targets allocated under the said scheme,
the term of said placement agency was accordingly extended by
the State Government, thereafter the term of said placement
agency was ultimately terminated on 15.06.2019. After the
termination, a new tender was floated in which the placement
agency namely B.S.A. Corporation, Pune was selected, which
entered into a contract with the State Government for the purpose
of providing manpower on various posts. Thus, a perusal of the
factual matrix shows that the State Government entered into a
contract with the placement agency for manpower and the
placement agency invited applications for appointment on various
posts on contract basis and after consideration, the persons like
the petitioners were given appointment, as such it is clear that the
petitioners' appointments was contractual, made by the placement
agency, their salary/remuneration was also paid by the placement
agency and therefore the petitioners are not either contractual or
regular employees of the State Government in any manner.
4. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners
claiming themselves to be the employees of the State Government
and have prayed for providing them regular pay-scale and salary
of the post directly from the State Government and not from the
placement agency and have also claimed regularisation.
5. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners
although have been engaged through placement agency but in
fact they are employees of the State Government. Counsel further
submits that their term was extended by the placement agency on
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(26 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
the recommendations of the State Government. Counsel further
submits that the scheme in question is still continuing but the
respondents in an arbitrary manner want to terminate their
services. Counsel further submits that in other States, the persons
have been directly appointed on contract basis by the State
Government and not through the placement agency, therefore, the
action of the respondents in terminating services of the petitioners
is violative of principles of natural justice. Counsel further submits
that the respondents have not paid due salary to the petitioners
and even in some of the cases, the respondents have orally
terminated their services. Counsel further submits that their salary
has already been reduced by the respondents without any
justifiable reason. Counsel further submits that the State
Government has enacted Rajasthan Contractual Hiring to Civil
Posts Rules, 2022 (hereinafter to be referred as the "Rules of
2022") vide notification dated 11.01.2022. Counsel further
submits that the respondents have also issued the order dated
31.03.2022 with regard to implementation of the Rules of 2022.
6. In support of the contentions, counsel for the petitioners
relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the matter of Mohd. Abdul Kadir & Anr. Vs. Director General
of Police, Assam & Ors. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 611.
7. Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG opposed the writ petitions and submitted
that there is no direct relationship of employee and employer
between the petitioners and the respondent-State. He further
submits that admittedly there is no privity of contract, as the
contract was entered between the placement agency and the
petitioners. He further submits that the scheme has been
sponsored by the Central Government and the petitioners have
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(27 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
failed to implead any of the concerned official of the Central
Government as party-respondent in the writ petitions. Counsel
further submits that during pendency of the writ petitions, number
of posts have been reduced and certain were abolished. Counsel
further submits that the Rules of 2022 framed by the State
Government provides for appointment of the persons on contract
basis directly by the State Government and as per Rule 5 of the
Rules of 2022, if the respondents fail to engage the persons on
contract basis then the applications have to be invited through
public advertisement, which is not the situation here as in the
present matter no public advertisement has been issued by the
State Government, rather the petitioners were appointed by the
placement agency, as such the Rules of 2022 are not at all
applicable in the case of the petitioners as they are not the
contractual employees of the State Government and lastly prayed
for dismissal of the writ petitions.
8. In support of the contentions, counsel for the respondents
relied upon the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this court in the matter of Rohitash Verma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3540/2020) and other connected petitions, decided on 24.11.2021.
9. Counsel further relied upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this court in the matter of Prahlad Sahai & Ors. Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14618/2020) decided on 07.07.2021.
10. Reliance was also placed upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this court in the matter of Khemraj Mali & Ors. (Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(28 of 30) [CW-6232/2019] Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.652/2021 decided on 05.08.2021.
11. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of K.K. Suresh & Anr. Vs. Food Corporation of India & Ors. reported in (2018) 17 Supreme Court Cases 641 in para No.7, has held as under:-
"In the first place, the Appellants failed to adduce any evidence to prove existence of any relationship between them and the FCI; Second, when the documents on record showed that the Appellants were appointed by the FCI Head Load Workers Co-Operative Society but not by the FCI then obviously the remedy of the Appellants, if at all, in relation to their any service dispute was against the said Society being their employer but not against the FCI; Third, the FCI was able to prove with the aid of evidence that the Appellants were in the employment of the said Society whereas the Appellants were not able to prove with the aid of any documents that they were appointed by the FCI and how and on what basis they claimed to be in the employment of the FCI except to make an averment in the writ petitions in that behalf. It was, in our opinion, not sufficient to grant any relief to the Appellants."
13. The Division Bench of this court in the matter of Rakesh Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.1040/2021 and other connected appeals, decided on 20.12.2021) has held as under:-
"This quite apart, there was clear agreement between the Government and the service provider which was essentially for providing the workforce for implementing the scheme. The entire responsibility of providing the workforce was on the service provider. The agreement clearly envisaged that upon completion of the tenure of the contract the workforce provided by the service provider would be withdrawn. In clear (Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM) (29 of 30) [CW-6232/2019] terms thus there was no privity of contract between Government and the petitioners.
This is not a case of engagement of the employees by the Government on contractual basis. The contract was between the Government and the service provider and if at all it may be an understanding between the service provider and the petitioners. In any case, the engagement cannot be seen as engagement of the petitioners by the Government on contractual basis. Any other view would make the task of the service provider wholly redundant and would also amount to overriding the agreement between the Government and the service provider. The general principle therefore that one set of contractual employees cannot be replaced by the another set of contractual employees as long as the work lasts cannot be applied in the present case.
In the result all the appeals are dismissed. Pending applications if any also stand disposed of."
14. Admittedly, there is no relationship of employee and employer between the petitioners and the respondents as the offer of appointment was given to the petitioners by the placement agency and the salary/remuneration was also paid to the petitioners by the placement agency. Initially, the contract was for a period of one year and the term of petitioners' services was further extended from time to time by the placement agency. The Rules of 2022 referred by the counsel for the petitioners relate to the persons appointed by the State Government on contract basis through public advertisement and admittedly the petitioners were not engaged as contractual employees directly by the State Government rather were appointed by the placement agency, as such the Rules of 2022 are not at all applicable in the case of the petitioners.
(Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM)
(30 of 30) [CW-6232/2019]
15. In view of the above discussion, these writ petitions filed by the petitioners deserve to be dismissed for the reasons; firstly, the petitioners have failed to establish their relationship of employee and employer with the respondent-State and only narration in the petition cannot be considered to be a justifiable ground to grant the relief prayed for, unless it is supported by cogent evidence on record as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of K.K. Suresh (supra); secondly, as per own version of the petitioners, they were appointment by the placement agency but failed to implead the placement agency as party respondent in the writ petitions; thirdly, the salary/remuneration was also paid to the petitioners by the placement agency and not by the State Government; and lastly claim of the petitioners for regularisation in the State cannot be approved by this court as the petitioners were never appointed by the State Government against sanctioned post on regular basis, rather, as already observed above they were appointed by the placement agency; therefore, in the facts and circumstances, the petitioners have completely failed to make out a case against the respondents, as such I am not inclined to exercise the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
16. As a result of the aforesaid discussion, these writ petitions fail and are hereby dismissed. A copy of the order be placed in each connected file.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J JYOTI /13-42 (Downloaded on 12/04/2022 at 08:59:14 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)