Allowed

Neelu Kumari Vaishnav v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2019CW/336/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A batch of 87 writ petitioners, claiming entitlement to appointment and seniority based on selection under Sections 20 and 21 of the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules 1971, sought relief. The High Court bench directly disposed of the case by following the precedent of a coordinate bench in Om Prakash & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, granting relief to the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners to be treated senior to respondents who were appointed later based on the same selection list and merit.

Neelu Kumari Vaishnav Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ No. 336/2019

¶4

Neelu Kumari Vaishnav D/o Ashok Kumar Vaishnav, Aged About 27 Years, 415, Ward No. 3, Gurjar Basti, Jhalarwavadi, Tehsil Ravatbhata, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).

¶5

Suresh Kumar Kanjar S/o Shanti Lal Kanjar, Aged About 34 Years, Village Renkhera, Post Badodiya, Tehsil Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).

¶6

Kalpana Chaudhary D/o Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 26 Years, Vpo Palthana Via Khuri Bari, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Raj.).

¶7

Suman D/o Sahiram, Aged About 27 Years, Village Kalakheri, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

¶8

Ram Kumar Meena S/o Vasanta Ram Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Kansothi Khera, Tehsil Bari, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶9

Sunita D/o Nemichand Meena, Aged About 33 Years, Quarter No. 67/iia, Tehsil Khetri Nagar, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

¶10

Santosh Meena D/o Sadhuram Meena, Aged About 31 Years, Ward No. 18, Buchchahira, Near Khara Kuwa, Tehsil Kotputali, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶11

Sunita Kanwar D/o Padam Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 30 Years, Village Didhel, Post Mamroda, Tehsil Didwana, District Nagaur (Raj.).

¶12

Sarita Kumari D/o Vidhyadhar Singh, Aged About 29 Years, Vpo Budaniya, Tehsil Chidawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

¶13

Sunita D/o Kumbha Ram, Aged About 28 Years, Vpo Kasumbi Jakhla, Tehsil Ladnu, District Nagaur (Raj.).

¶14

Munni D/o Pema Ram, Aged About 29 Years, Vpo Sablpura, Tehsil Kuchaman City, District Nagaur (Raj.).

¶15

Poonam Rahar D/o Brij Lal W/o Indraj, Aged About 30 Years, By Caste Jat, R/o Village 19 Gd, Tehsil Gharsana, District Shriganganagar (Raj.).

¶16

Ghanshyam Das S/o Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 29 Years, Village Sarangsar, Post Luhara, Tehsil Bidasar,

¶17

(2 of 9)

¶18

[CW-336/2019]

¶19

District Churu (Raj.).

¶20

Suresh Bundela S/o Daulat Ram, Aged About 31 Years, Near Old Water Works, Ward No. 21, Khatikan Mohalla, Sadulpur, District Churu (Raj.).

¶21

Manoj Kumar Rana S/o Shrawan Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, Vpo Sandwa, Tehsil Bidasar, District Churu (Raj.).

¶22

Laxmi Swami D/o Haridas Swami, Aged About 31 Years, Near Saraswati Senior Secondary School, Ward No. 14 (New), Suratgarh, District Shri Ganganagar (Raj.).

¶23

Prem Shankar Salvi S/o Kishan Lal, Aged About 31 Years, Vpo Boodh, Tehsil Gangrar, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).

¶24

Rajesh Kumar Meena S/o Sumer Singh Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Denda Basedi, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa (Raj.).

¶25

Babbu Ram Meena S/o Kedar Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Bonl, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karouli (Raj.).

¶26

Khemraj Meena S/o Roop Narayan Meena, Aged About 28 Years, Village Khedli, Post Bagali, Tehsil Wazirpur, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.).

¶27

Hem Singh S/o Vishram Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Vpo Bonl, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karouli (Raj.).

¶28

Satveer S/o Bhanwar Lal Meghwal, Aged About 29 Years, Village Bijrasar, Post Sadasar, Tehsil Sardarshahar, District Churu (Raj.).

¶29

Janak Kanwar D/o Shankar Dan, Aged About 35 Years, Vpo Dhanada, Mokampur, Tehsil Bali, District Pali (Raj.).

¶30

Sunita Singh D/o Jatan Singh W/o Motilal Gurjar, Aged About 39 Years, Anchi Ka Bas, Gudha Road, Bandikui, District Dausa (Raj.).

¶31

Heera Lal Gurjar S/o Hajari Lal Gurjar, Aged About 31 Years, Village Basni, Post Khatamala Via Kelva, District Rajsamand (Raj.).

¶32

Rekha Gurjar D/o Udai Lal Gurjar, Aged About 26 Years, Village Piparda (Bhatta), Tehsil And District Rajsamand (Raj.).

¶33

Narayan Lal Gurjar S/o Udairam Gurjar, Aged About 28 Years, Vpo Piparda (Bhatta), Tehsil And District Rajsamand (Raj.).

¶34

Jeetendra Singh S/o Vishram Singh, Aged About 25 Years,

¶35

(3 of 9)

¶36

[CW-336/2019]

¶37

Vpo Devlen, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karouli (Raj.).

¶38

Shalini Meena D/o Gokul Chand Meena, Aged About 30 Years, Vpo Raghunathpura, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶39

Parwati Kumari D/o Khoob Ram Regar W/o Gurdeep Kumar Rachoya, Aged About 29 Years, Vpo Benad Via Jhotwara, Jaipur District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶40

Gajanand Acharya S/o Dev Kishan Acharya, Aged About 40 Years, Acharya Haveli, Ward No. 6, Tehsil Taranagar, District Churu (Raj.).

¶41

Om Prakash S/o Hema Ram, Aged About 30 Years, Gulasar, Post Birloka, Tehsil Khinwsar, District Nagaur (Raj.).

¶42

Versha Sahu D/o Brij Mohan Sahu, Aged About 34 Years, House No. 10A, Tulsani Clinic Wali Line, Rangbadi Road, Keshavpura Iind Chouraha, Dadabadi, Kota, District Kota (Raj.).

¶43

Vinod Kumar Meena S/o Poonam Mal Meena, Aged About 32 Years, Ward No. 18, Meeno Ka Mohalla, Near Of Gopinath Ji Temple, Udaipurwati, Near Of Gopinath Ji Temple, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

¶44

Manoj Kumar Meena S/o Jagmohan Meena, Aged About 30 Years, Pathwari Ka Mohalla, Ward No. 5, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar (Raj.).

¶45

Rajendra Prasad S/o Surjaram, Aged About 51 Years, Asha Wali Dhani, Budana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

¶46

Jitu Kumar Meena S/o Lalaram Meena, Aged About 29 Years, Dhingariya, Post Garh Basai, Tehsil Thanagaji, District Alwar (Raj.).

¶47

Mohammed Anwar S/o Shareef Ali, Aged About 36 Years, Soopka, Tehsil Didwana, District Nagaur (Raj.).

¶48

Hans Raj Meena S/o Prabhu Lal Meena, Aged About 36 Years, Village Mathji Ka Khera, Post Kuradiya, District Bhilwara (Raj.).

¶49

Dinesh Chand Meena S/o Thandi Rma Meena, Aged About 28 Years, Vpo Karsai, Tehsil And District Karouli (Raj.).

¶50

Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Surgyani Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Village Rampura, Post Pawta, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶51

(4 of 9)

¶52

[CW-336/2019]

¶53

Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Gopal Lal Meena, Aged About 32 Years, Vpo Jatwara, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶54

Jumma Khan S/o Jivan Khan, Aged About 30 Years, Vpo Harsana, Laxmangarh, District Alwar (Raj.).

¶55

Ravi Kumar S/o Amar Singh, Aged About 32 Years, Housing Board Colony, Bari Road, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶56

Shweta Vyas D/o Rajesh Kumar Vyas W/o Ajay Lawania, Aged About 30 Years, 51-A, New Civil Lines, Near Saras Hotel, District Bharatpur (Raj.).

¶57

Ram Maya D/o Ram Lakhan W/o Lokendra Singh, Aged About 29 Years, By Cate Gurjar R/o Ondela Road, Durga Colony, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶58

Vishl Khandelwal S/o Gokul Chand Khandelwal, Aged About 32 Years, Khandelwal Dharamshala Ke Pass, Shiv Colony, Jaipur Road, Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.).

¶59

Babali D/o Hari Babu W/o Hori Lal, Aged About 28 Years, Village Duvepura, Post Ghari Chatola, Tehsil Saipau, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶60

Brijesh Kumar Saxena S/o Chhattar Saxena, Aged About 29 Years, Vpo Helak, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur (Raj.).

¶61

Anita Dhaka D/o Rohitashw Kumar, Aged About 28 Years, Vpo Dhewa Ki Dhani, Girdharpura, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

¶62

Uma Garg D/o Hariom Garg, Aged About 26 Years, Near Roadways Bus Stand, Teachers Colony, Basedi, Tehsil Baseri, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶63

Anupam Sharma D/o Ashok Kumar Sharma, Aged About 25 Years, 476/3, Near Shiv Jyoti Public School, Ayodhya Kunj Colony, Saipau Road, Dholpur, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶64

Rajesh Kumar Yadav S/o Haree Chandra Jatav, Aged About 39 Years, Vpo Tesgoan, Tehsil Nadoti, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶65

Vishvendra Singh S/o Sukhveer Singh, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Tighariya, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶66

Sunita Kumari D/o Hariniwas, Aged About 33 Years, Village Mundia (Baisla Patti), Post Mundia, Tehsil

¶67

(5 of 9)

¶68

[CW-336/2019]

¶69

Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶70

Rambharosi S/o Ramkhiladi, Aged About 33 Years, Village Emaratanpura, Post Sunderpura, Tehsil And District Karauli (Raj.).

¶71

Ramsnehi S/o Bharat Singh, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Tighariya, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶72

Abdhesh Kumar Bairwa S/o Radhe Shyam Bairwa, Aged About 28 Years, Village Balwantpura, Post Khedla, Tehsil Spotra, District Karouli (Raj.).

¶73

Sanjiv Kumar S/o Narendra Kumar, Aged About 25 Years, Adarsh Nagarm, Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.).

¶74

Rajesh Kumar Meena S/o Bhura Lal Meena, Aged About 31 Years, Village Badramsar, Post Heerapur, Tehsil Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.).

¶75

Vimlesh Meena D/o Kalayan Prashad Meena, Aged About 31 Years, Maharaj Bagh, Sant Nagar Road, Bari, District Dholpur (Raj.).

¶76

Kushumlata D/o Niranjan Prasad, Aged About 32 Years, Gandhi Nagar Colony, Sewar Road, Bharatpur, District Bharatpur (Raj.).

¶77

Sitaram Meena S/o Ramet Meena, Aged About 26 Years, Village Madhorajpura, Post Aket, Tehsil Sapotra, District Karouli (Raj.).

¶78

Seema Kumari Sokarval D/o Natthan Lal Sokarval W/o Manish Kumar Jatav, Aged About 26 Years, Ronsi, Tehsil Nadauti, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶79

Ogan Singh Gurjar S/o Ramkhilari Gurjar, Aged About 31 Years, Rajpur, Post Tulsipura, Tehsil And District Karauli (Raj.).

¶80

Govind Prasad Kumhar S/o Moolchand Kumhar, Aged About 33 Years, Vpo Thana, Tehsil Masalpur, District Karauli.

¶81

Guddi D/o Nangu Mahawar, Aged About 39 Years, Guruji Ke Bag Ka Rasta, Mahwa, District Dausa (Raj.).

¶82

Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Sher Singh Meena, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vpo Parla, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶83

Vigyan Singh Meena S/o Bharosi Lal Meena, Aged About 32 Years, Rundhpura, Tehsil Masalpur, Karauli (Raj.).

¶84

(6 of 9)

¶85

[CW-336/2019]

¶86

Kamar Bahadur Meena S/o Dharm Singh Meena, Aged About 30 Years, Vpo Kotari, Tehsil Hindaun City, District Karauli (Raj.).

¶87

----Petitioners

¶88

Versus

¶89

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Education Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶90

The Secretary Cum Commissioner, Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶91

The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan).

¶92

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶93

The District Elementary Education Officer, Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶94

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur (Raj.).

¶95

The District Elementary Education Officer, Nagaur (Raj.).

¶96

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).

¶97

The District Elementary Education Officer, Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).

¶98

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dholpur (Raj.).

¶99

The District Elementary Education Officer, Dholpur (Raj.).

¶100

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Rajsamand (Raj.).

¶101

The District Elementary Education Officer, Rajsamand (Raj.).

¶102

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Karouli (Raj.).

¶103

The District Elementary Education Officer, Karouli (Raj.). 16. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Chittorgarh (Raj.).

¶104

The District Elementary Education Officer, Chittorgarh (Raj.).

¶105

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶106

The District Elementary Education Officer, Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶107

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Churu (Raj.).

¶108

(7 of 9)

¶109

[CW-336/2019]

¶110

The District Elementary Education Officer, Churu (Raj.).

¶111

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Bikaner (Raj.).

¶112

The District Elementary Education Officer, Bikaner (Raj.).

¶113

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Badmer (Raj.).

¶114

The District Elementary Education Officer, Badmer (Raj.).

¶115

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Bhilwara (Raj.).

¶116

The District Elementary Education Officer, Bhilwara (Raj.).

¶117

----Respondents

¶118

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.S. Bhati For Respondent(s) :

¶119

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶120

Order

¶121

09/01/2019

¶122

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that for the same recruitment, similarly situated petitioners had approached Jaipur Bench of this Court in Om Prakash & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21214/2017 , which writ petition has been decided on 21.11.2017 granting relief to the petitioners in light of judgment in the case of Hemlata Shrimali & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3247/2015, decided on 01.04.2015 and relying upon the adjudication in the case of Suman Bai & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381 and, therefore, the present writ petition may also be decided in light of judgment in the case of Om Prakash (supra).

¶123

In the case of Om Prakash (supra), the Bench at Jaipur after noticing orders in the case of Hemlata Shrimali (supra) and Suman Bai (supra) observed as under:-

¶124

“Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very

¶125

(8 of 9)

¶126

[CW-336/2019]

¶127

outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in a batch of writ applications lead case being S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 3247/2015: Hemlata Shrimali & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 1st Apri., 2015, relying upon the adjudication in the case of Suman Bai & Anr. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.: 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, observing thus:

¶128

“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 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.

¶129

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

¶130

(9 of 9)

¶131

[CW-336/2019]

¶132

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.

¶133

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.”

¶134

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that instant writ application be also disposed off in terms of the order dated 24th May, 2017, as extracted herein above. Ordered accordingly.”

¶135

In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition filed by the petitioners is also disposed of in light of order passed in the case of Om Prakash (supra).

¶136

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶137

417-AK Chouhan/-

Neelu Kumari Vaishnav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neelu Kumari Vaishnav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyama Vyas Vs State of Rajasthan

Shabbir Mohammad Mansuri Vs State of Rajasthan

Pramila Jeengar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mangi Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunita Meena Vs State of Rajasthan