IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Dinesh Mehta, J.
Sujana Ram & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8018/2021
Decided on : 02-07-2021
Res Judicata - Appointment Dispute - The court directed the respondents to treat the petitioners senior to respondents who were in lower order of merit, and to consider their appointment from the date the candidates lower in merit were appointed, with all consequential benefits of service. The petitioners were required to make a representation to the competent authority, and upon consideration, if covered by the judgments cited, notional benefits would be accorded, subject to an undertaking for restitution if the judgment is reversed or modified.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought direction to the respondents to treat their appointment from the date the candidates lower in merit were appointed, with all consequential benefits of service.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to consider the appointment of the petitioners from the date the candidates lower in merit were appointed, and to accord notional benefits subject to certain conditions.
Issues: Appointment dispute, entitlement to consequential benefits of service, representation to competent authority, and undertaking for restitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The petitioners were entitled to be treated senior to respondents in lower order of merit and to be considered for appointment from the date the lower merit candidates were appointed, with all consequential benefits of service.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioners to make a representation to the competent authority, and if covered by the cited judgments, notional benefits would be accorded, subject to an undertaking for restitution if the judgment is reversed or modified.
JUDGMENT
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 7283/2014, decided on 16.07.2014 at Jaipur Bench and the said judgment has been followed in Krishan Lal & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 19179/2017, decided on 30.10.2017 at Jaipur Bench. The petitioners are also entitled to the same relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and Krishan Lal (supra) claims learned counsel.
2. In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with the similar directions as given in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra), which read as under:-
It is further contended in the writ petition that in the matter of School Lecturers (English) in the same Department, where appointments were delayed because of the fault of the State authorities, the candidates were accorded appointment from the date the candidates stood lower in merit were appointed and they have been granted all consequential benefits of services.
The petitioners approached the respondents by way of representations for extending them same benefits of service which have been granted to the candidates who stood lower in merit than the petitioners, but till date nothing has been done. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of the petitioners for a direction to the respondents to treat their appointment from the date the candidates lower in merit, were given, with all consequential benefits of service, such as seniority, continuity of service, pay fixation, grant of annual grade increments.
Having regard to the facts of the case, writ petition is disposed of requiring the petitioners to make a representation to respondent no.2 - Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, alongwith a copy of this order, who shall, after verifying the facts stated above, consider and decide the same by a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of its making, addressing the grievance of the petitioners for extending them the relief as prayed for, as the candidates, who stood lower in merit, are getting benefit of higher pay, seniority, annual grade increments and other service benefits including the selection scales. If the respondent no.2 decides to place the petitioners above in seniority than the candidates who stood lower in merit, then the petitioners would be entitled to all benefits of seniority but they would be entitled only to notional benefits."
3. For the purpose aforesaid, the petitioner shall file representation before the competent authority giving out the requisite details along with certified copy of the order instant within a period of four weeks from today. On receipt of the representation, the concerned respondent shall decide the same, in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation and accord notional benefits to the petitioner from the date persons similarly situated to them and lower in merit were given appointment.
4. Upon consideration of the representation so filed, if respondents find the case of the petitioners to be covered by the judgment(s) aforesaid, before giving actual benefits, an undertaking shall be procured from the petitioners to the effect that their rights/entitlements shall be subservient to the fate of the judgment(s) aforesaid and in case the same is reversed or modified in any manner,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.