Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Pukhraj vs State Of Rajasthan on 17 January, 2019
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ No. 857/2019
1. Pukhraj S/o Chuna Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village
Achina, Tehsil Khinwsar, District Nagaur (Raj.). (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gps, Hisaba Talab, Achina,
P.s. Mundwa, District Nagaur).
2. Neetu Singh Devera D/o Ashok Singh Devera, W/o Trilok
Singh,, Aged About 29 Years, R/o House No. 250, Gali
No.3, Devi Road, Chandna Bhakhar, Jodhpur (Raj.).
(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Sanskrit At Gups,
Gopalsar Bhakri, Devgarh Ist, P.s. Balesar, District
Jodhpur).
3. Mahendra Singh S/o Ghewar Ram,, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Village And Post Palri Sidda, Tehsil Pipar Shahar,
District Jodhpur (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii
Level-Ii Social Studies At Gups, Sinla, P.s. Jaitaran,
District Pali).
4. Saroj Charan S/o Lakh Dan Charan,, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Mehra Joton Ka Bass, Marwar Mathania,
District Jodhpur (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii
Level-I At Gps, Janiyo Ki Dhani, Bhenser Kutri, P.s. Osian,
District Jodhpur).
5. Trilok Dan Charan S/o Bhanwar Singh,, Aged About 31
Years, R/o 362, Aguna Bas, Mathaniya, Tehsil Tinwari,
District Jodhpur (Raj.)(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-I
At Gps, Chabralo Ki Dhani, Kharda Mewasa, P.s. Osiyan,,
District Jodhpur)
6. Isha Khatrani D/o Vasudev,, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
58, P- Block, Sri Ganganagar (Raj.). (Initially Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level- Ii Science Maths At Gups,
Chainpura, Nayabas, P.s. Bansur, District Alwar, Presently
Posted At Ggups, Hamirpur, P.s. Bansur, District Alwar).
7. Lakshmi Kumari D/o Magan Lal Chouhan, W/o Jitendra
Kumar,, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Meghwal Vas, Near
Ramdev Mandir, Kiwarli, District Sirohi (Raj.). (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gps, Damarfai (Panchdeval),
P.s. Pindwara, District Sirohi).
8. Main Pal S/o Prem Raj,, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village
29 Lnp (Lanewala), Post Ridmalsar, Gram Panchayat 69
Lnp, Tehsil Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).
(2 of 7) [CW-857/2019]
(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gps, 2 Msd, 35 Ad
(Mashaniwala), P.s. Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri
Ganganagar).
9. Santosh Rani D/o Hanuman Prasad W/o Main Pal,, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o Village 59 Lnp (Lanewala), Post
Ridmalsar, Gram Panchayat 69 Lnp, Tehsil Padampur,
District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade
Iii Level-I At Gps, 4 Dwm, Birmana, P.s. Suratgarh,
District Sri Ganganagar).
10. Jakhar Ram Saini S/o Kailash Chandra Saini,, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Village Gangaram Ki Dhani, Post Dayara,
Via Khandela, District Sikar (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher
Grade Iii Level-Ii Social Science At Gups, Karoi,
(Kerpura), P.s. Khandela, District Sikar).
11. Rekha D/o Phoolchand W/o Narendra Bijarniya,, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Village Jankipura, Via Sri Madhoopur,
Tehsil Khandela, District Sikar (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher
Grade Iii Level- Ii Hindi At Gups, Neemdawali, P.s.
Khandela, District Sikar).
12. Veena Meena D/o Murari Lal Meena, W/o Chhagan Lal
Meena,, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Lambor
Chinpiyon, Post Lambor Badi, Tehsil Rajgarh, District
Churu (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level- Ii Social
Studies At Gups, Sirsala, P.s. Churu, District Churu).
13. Suresh Jat S/o Sitaram Jat,, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Ward No. 23, Dhani Bankli, Post Kachiyagarh, Tehsil
Srimadhopur, District Sikar (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher
Grade Iii Level-I At Gups, Bassi, P.s. Khandela, District
Sikar).
14. Pramila Meena D/o Jagdish Meena, W/o Pradeep Kumar
Meena,, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Sonasar Via
Chanuri, Tehsil Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). (Posted
As Teacher Grade Iii Level- I At Gps, Mithri, Balwant
Singh, P.s. Rajgarh, District Churu).
15. Kanchan Kuamri D/o Ramniwas Meena,, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Village And Post Bhodki, Tehsil Udaipurwati,
District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii
Level- I At Gps, Chhota Kerpura, P.s. Khandela, District
Sikar).
16. Kamlesh Kumari Saini D/o Kalyan Sahay Saini,, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o Village Bassi, Via Srimadhopur, Tehsil
(3 of 7) [CW-857/2019]
Khandela, District Sikar (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade
Iii Level- Ii Sanskrit At Gups, Bassi, P.s. Khandela, District
Sikar).
17. Kavita D/o Lal Chand Nehra,, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Ward No. 23, Dhani Bakli, Kachiyagar, Tehsil Sri
Madhopur, District Sikar (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade
Iii Level- Ii English At Gaups, Bhalundi, Bhadesar, P.s.
Gangrar, District Chittorgarh).
18. Garima Chouhan D/o Ramswaroop Chouhan,, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Kund Gate, Shahpura, District Bhilwara
(Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level- Ii Science
Maths At Gups, Shambhupura (Tahnaal), P.s. Shahpura,
District Bhilwara).
19. Ram Narayan Balai S/o Jalam Balai,, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Ward No.3, Balaiyo Ka Mohalla, Soniyana,
District Chittorgarh (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii
Level- I At Gps, Khokhra Dhani (Rawarda), P.s. Begun,
District Chittorgarh).
20. Madhu Kumari Katara D/o Lajras Katara W/o Prafulla
Chauhan,, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Chandra Veer
Garh, Vithal Dev, Post Sagrod, Tehsil And District
Banswara (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level- Ii
Sanskrit At Ggups, Karji, P.s. Bagidora, District
Banswara).
21. Arvind Kumar S/o Biri Singh,, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Village Bartai, Post Usrani, Tehsil Kumher, District
Bharatpur (Raj.). (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level- Ii
English At Gskups, Kalikhol, P.s. Mandalgarh, District
Bhilwara, Presently Posted As Ghss, Baldarkha, P.s.
Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara).
22. Nandkishor Sharma S/o Mahesh Chand Sharma,, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Bijwari, Tehsil
Bhusawar, District Bharatpur (Raj.) (Posted As Teacher
Grade Iii Level- Ii English At Gups, Jalam Ki Jhopadiya,
P.s. Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara. Presently Posted At
Gsss, Genoli, P.s. Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
(4 of 7) [CW-857/2019]
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur.
5. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Nagaur.
6. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur.
7. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Jodhpur.
8. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pali.
9. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Pali.
10. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar.
11. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Alwar.
12. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sirohi.
13. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Sirohi.
14. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sri Ganganagar.
15. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Sri
Ganganagar.
16. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sikar.
17. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Sikar.
18. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Churu.
19. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Churu.
20. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Chittorgarh.
21. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Chittorgarh.
22. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Bhilwara.
23. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Bhilwara.
24. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Bhilwara.
25. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Banswara.
26. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Banswara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Kumar
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order 17/01/2019 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment rendered by Jaipur Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Surja (5 of 7) [CW-857/2019] Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. - SBCW No.3082/2018, decided on 09.02.2018. The judgment reads as under:-
"The controversy raised in the instant writ application is no more res-integra in view of the adjudication made in the case of Suman Bai & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, wherein the Coordinate Bench of this Court observed thus:
"5. Upon consideration of the arguments aforesaid and the judgment of the Division Bench in Hari Ram and the subsequent order dated 21.7.2001 whereby clarification mapplication of the State Government was dismissed, I find that the entitlement of the petitioner for appointment on the basis of originally prepared merit list cannot be denied. If admittedly the candidates, who are lower in merit, have been granted appointment, those who are above them in the merit cannot be denied such right of appointment. Seniority as per the rules in the case of direct recruitment on the post in question is required to be assigned on the basis of placement of candidates in the select list and when the selection is common and the merit list on the basis of which appointments were made is also common, right to secure appointment to both the set of employees thus flows from their selection which in turn is based on merit. Regard being had to all these facts, merely because one batch of employee approached this Court later and another earlier, and both of them having been appointed, the candidates who appeared 6 lower in merit cannot certainly be placed at a higher place in seniority. It was on this legal analogy that Division Bench of this Court in Niyaz Mohd.Khan (supra) held that the petitioner therein entitled to be placed in seniority in order of merit of common selection amongst persons appointed in pursuance of the same selection with effect from the date person lower in order of merit than the petitioner was appointed with consequential benefits.
6. I am not inclined to accept the argument of the learned counsel for the respondents No.4 to 8 that the judgment of the learned Single Judge should be so read so as to infer therefrom that though the petitioners would be entitled to claim appointment but not seniority above the candidates who are already appointed even though they admittedly are above them in the merit list. Infact, the judgment of the learned Single Judge merely reiterated the direction of the Division Bench in Hari Ram (supra) in favour of the petitioners. But construction of that judgment in the (6 of 7) [CW-857/2019] manner in which the respondents want this Court to do, would negat the mandate of the Rules 20 and 21 of the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971, which requires seniority to be assigned as per the inter-se merit of 7 the candidates in the merit list based on common selection. Even otherwise, no such intention of the Court is discernible from reading of that judgment. Mere appointment of the petitioner was a sufficient compliance of the judgment and not total compliance was the view taken by this Court also when contempt petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed. Question with regard to correct and wrong assignment of seniority having arisen subsequent to appointment of the petitioners would obviously give rise to a afresh cause of action. The writ petition filed by the petitioners, therefore, cannot be thrown either barred by resjudicata or otherwise improperly constituted.
7. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to treat the petitioners senior to respondents No.4 to 8 as per their placement in the merit list."
Applying the principle, as extracted hereinabove, to the facts of the case at hand the factual position emerges is that the petitioners participated in the recruitment process in response to advertisement issued by Zila Parishad in the year 2012, inviting the applications from the eligible candidates for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners earlier instituted writ applications and as a consequence of directions issued by this Court, the result was revised in the month of November, 2016; resulting into appointment of the petitioners on the post of Teacher Grade III (Level I/Level-II).
Undeniably, the petitioners have already been accorded appointment. However, State-respondents have declined seniority and other benefits to the petitioners from the date the petitioners became entitled on account of revision of the result while candidates lower in merit to the petitioners have been accorded those benefits. Thus, the petitioners have claimed benefit of pay fixation and seniority on notional basis from the date juniors to the petitioners, have been accorded in the same recruitment process of the year 2012.
Accordingly, the State-respondents are directed to extend the benefit of pay fixation and seniority on notional basis to the petitioners from the date junior(s) to the petitioner(s) has/have been accorded with reference to the same recruitment process of the year of 2012.
(7 of 7) [CW-857/2019] In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the issue of petitioners in terms of the judgment of Surja Ram (Supra) by a speaking order within a period of 30 days from today.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J 181-AK Chouhan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)