Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Satyanarayan Sunda vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 August, 2018
Author: P.K. Lohra
Bench: P.K. Lohra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ No. 11762/2018
1. Satyanarayan Sunda S/o Omprakash Sunda, Aged About
30 Years, Village Rewasi, Post Nethawa, Tehsil Taranagar,
District Churu. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii
Sanskrit At Gups, Hardanpuru (Nehron Ki Nadi), P.s.
Dhanau, District Barmer)
2. Kuldeep Meena S/o Ghansi Lal, Aged About 33 Years,
Village Sunthli, Post Dhanu Gaon, Tehsil Nainwa, District
Bundi. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gps, Hirani
Godaro Ki Basti (Sondi), P.s. Sedwa, District Barmer)
3. Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Mangi Lal, Aged About 32 Years,
Village Bhindakua, Post Bithuja, Tehsil Pachpadra, District
Barmer. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Social
Studies At Gups, Tiloka Ram Ka Kua, Bhanwar, P.s.
Sedwa, District Barmer)
4. Om Prakash S/o Bhagirath Ram, Aged About 29 Years,
Siyako/ Rado Ki Dhani, Post Akoli, Tehsil Chitalwana,
District Jalore. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At
Gups, Lumbhawas, P.s. Budamalani, District Barmer)
5. Chanani D/o Chimana Ram, Aged About 28 Years,
Jakharo Ka Tala, Vpo Khadeen, Tehsil Ramsar, District
Barmer. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gps,
Achlaniyo Ki Dhani, Langera, P.s. Aati, District Barmer)
6. Manju D/o Prameshwar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, Chara
Ka Bas, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu. (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Social Science At Gups, Ramani
Jakhro Ki Dhani (Mithra Khurd), P.s. Dhorimana, District
Barmer)
7. Rajesh Choudhary S/o Bhera Ram Choudhary, Aged About
29 Years, Target Plus, Hanuman Temple, Ward No. 17,
Shastri Nagar, Barmer. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-
Ii Subject Hindi At Gups, Labrau, Ramser, P.s. Ramser,
District Barmer)
8. Devendra Kumar Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, Court
Toad, Gangapur City, District Swai Madhopur. (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Social Studies At Gups, Judi,
Sindhaswa Harniyan, P.s. Gudamalai, District Barmer)
9. Ashok Kumar S/o Jaslal, Aged About 32 Years, C/o
(2 of 7) [CW-11762/2018]
Ganshyam Gosai, Ganga Mandir Ke Peeche, C.d. Model
School Ke Pass, Dhorimanna, District Barmer. (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Science Maths At Guups,
Mansingh Ki Beri, Khari Gaav, P.s. Dhormanna, District
Barmer)
10. Satyaveer Kumar Barkodia S/o Bhagwan Sahaya, Aged
About 37 Years, Subhash Nagar, Behind Police Thana,
Dhorimanna, District Barmer. Permanent Address- Vpo
Giruri, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar. (Posted As Teacher
Grade Iii Level-Ii Science Maths At Gups, Rello Ki Beri
(Udasar), P.s. Dhorimanna, District Barmer)
11. Jitendra Nagar S/o Tarachand Nagar, Aged About 31
Years, Subhash Nagar, Behind Police Thana, Dhorimanna,
District Barmer. Permanent Address- Village Mukarpura,
Post Bandikui, District Dausa. (Posted As Teacher Grade
Iii Level-Ii Science Maths At Gups, Sheraniyo Ki Dhani,
Koliyana, P.s. Dhorimanna, District Barmer)
12. Anil Kumar Gothwal S/o Chhangaram Gothwal, Aged
About 34 Years, Vpo Gadoj, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar.
(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Science Maths At
Gups, Sinhar (Salariya), P.s. Sedwa, District Barmer)
13. Bhagwati D/o Girdhari, Aged About 41 Years, 236, Pratap
Nagar Vistar, Vaidhji Ka Chouraha, Murlipura, Jaipur.
(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Social Studies At
Gups, Sinhar (Salariya), P.s. Sedwa, District Barmer)
14. Mahesh Chand Saini S/o Prabhu Dayal Saini, Aged About
29 Years, Vpo Bilali, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar. (Posted
As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Sanskrit At Gups, Tanka
Station (Deengarh), P.s. Dhanau, District Barmer)
15. Bhanwar Lal Dotasra S/o Banwari Lal, Aged About 31
Years, Village Alakhpura Bogan, Tehsil Laxmangarh,
District Sikar. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii
Science Maths At Gups, Nai Dandali (Dandali), P.s.
Sindhari, District Barmer)
16. Motee Lal Meena S/o Batti Lal Meena, Aged About 28
Years, Village Kiratpura, Post Nimod, Tehsil Malarna
Dungar, District Sawai Madhopur. (Posted As Teacher
Grade Iii Level-I At Gps, Mansingh Ki Basti, Salariya, P.s.
Sedwa, District Barmer)
17. Dharmveer Samariya S/o Raju Samariya, Aged About 30
Years, Vpo Andhi, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur.
(3 of 7) [CW-11762/2018]
(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Science Maths At
Gups, Jato Ka Koaa, Aehshan Ka Tala, P.s. Sedwa, District
Barmer)
18. Achal Singh S/o Sona Ram, Aged About 34 Years, Vpo
Malpura, District Barmer. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii
Level-I At Gups, Laxmanpura, Mehalu, P.s. Dhorimanna,
District Barmer)
19. Meghram S/o Banai Singh, Aged About 31 Years, Vpo
Andhiya Khera, Tehsil Nadoti, District Karauli. (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gps, Pabthoon Jaker Ki Dhani,
P.s. Sedwa, District Barmer)
20. Banshi Lal Bamniya S/o Majana Ram Bamniya, Aged
About 32 Years, Village And Post Khume Ki Beri, Tehsil
Dhorimanna, District Barmer. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii
Level-I At Gps, Bhali Khal, P.s. Dhorimanna, District
Barmer)
21. Sangeet Lata D/o Daya Ram, Aged About 30 Years,
Village Pareu, Tehsil Gida, District Barmer. (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii At Gups, Dungranada, P.s. Gida,
District Barmer)
22. Savita D/o Sheesh Ram, Aged About 33 Years, (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Sanskrit At Gups, Khichro Ki
Dhani (Rohila West), Sonari, P.s. Sedwa, District Barmer)
23. Gopi Kishan S/o Asu Ram, Aged About 33 Years, Village
Siwada, Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore. (Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii Level-I At Gups, Purawa Arniyali, P.s.
Dhorimanna, District Barmer)
24. Vinod Kumar Saini S/o Kaloo Ram Saini, Aged About 33
Years, Village And Post Kankar Wali Dhani, Ranoli, Ward
No. 11, District Sikar. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-
Ii Science Maths At Gups, Darjio Ka Bera, Lapundra, P.s.
Gida, District Barmer)
25. Renuka Choudhary D/o Laxman Singh, Aged About 31
Years, Village Govindpura, Via Palasana,tehsil Khandela,
District Sikar. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii
Science Maths At Gups, Gugdi (Akarli Dhansingh) P.s.
Balotra, District Barmer)
26. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Narain Lal, Aged About 34
Years, Meena Colony, Saithal Mode, Near By Bhagwati
School, Dausa. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii
Science Maths At Gups, Samdri Ka Gala, Ogala, P.s.
(4 of 7) [CW-11762/2018]
Sedwa, District Barmer)
27. Bhajan Lal Sau S/o Bharmal Ram Sau, Aged About 28
Years, Vpo Sewara, Tehsil Raniwara, District Jalore.
(Posted As Teacher Grade Iii Level-Ii Social Studies At
Gups, Panawali, P.s. Gudamalani, District Barmer)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Barmer
4. The District Education Officer, Elementary, District Barmer
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Order 24/08/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by Jaipur Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Surja 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 application of the State Government was (5 of 7) [CW-11762/2018] 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 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 (6 of 7) [CW-11762/2018] 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-11762/2018] In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the case of petitioners in terms of the judgment of Surja Ram (Supra) by a speaking order within a period of 30 days from today.
(P.K. LOHRA),J Anil Kumar Choudhary/10 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)