JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Mehta, J.

The instant bunch of intra-court appeals arises out of identical orders passed by learned Single Bench whereby, following the Division Bench judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Poonam Sharma (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.815/2019, decided on 29.08.2019), the learned Single Bench directed the appellant State to undertake the exercise as has been directed by the Division Bench in the case of Poonam Sharma (supra) as below:-

“The brief facts of the case are that Senior Teachers recruited under the 1971 Rules are, recruited and posted in 9 different divisions. Their inter se seniority is separately maintained on division-wise basis. Their transfer from one division to another entails loss of seniority, under the Rules. Consequently, allocation of divisions assumes some importance. The State Government through a specific policy contained in its guide-lines of 04.03.2018, endeavored to introduce transparency in allocations of divisions; such exercise was to be determined on the basis of merit-cum-preference (having regard to the relative success) of the candidates in the recruitment process. This, of course, was subject to availability of vacancies in the respective divisions.”

2. Learned AAG Shri Pankaj Sharma and Shri Rishi Soni representing the State submitted that the ratio of the Division Bench Judgment in the case of Poonam Sharma (supra) could not have been applied in the present controversy because the said judgment arose out of a selection process relating to Teachers Grade-II whereas the present controversy relates to appointment and posting of Teachers Grade-III (Level-I & Level-II) and hence, the impugned orders are bad in the eyes of law. Shri Sharma urged that the respondents herein, after selection vide the initial select list were provided postings in accordance with their choice with reference to their position in the merit. Thereafter, reshuffling took place as many candidates did not turn up for document verification and others did not appear for joining. As a consequence of the above situation, litigation ensued and this Court, in the cases of Kuldeep Kumar & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP No.2094/2019) and Lokendra Singh & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan (SBCWP No.1188/2020) directed the State to fill up the vacant posts by operating the category-wise reserve list and in compliance of the aforesaid directions, the State Government issued an order dated 18.12.2020 proposing to fill the vacant posts by issuing the waiting list from the existing merit position. Shri Sharma urged that the recruitment in the case of Poonam Sharma (supra) was for the post of Senior Teachers under the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 whereas the recruitment in the cases at hand has been made under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. He urged that there is a fundamental difference in the posts of Senior Teachers, Teachers Grade-II and the Teachers Grade-III because in the former cadre, the seniority is maintained division-wise whereas, in the case of Teachers Grade-III, the seniority is maintained district-wise. He further drew the Court’s attention to the policy decision taken by the Government vide minutes dated 25.02.2019 wherein, the Division Bench judgment in the case of Rajasthan Public Service Commission vs. Jata Shanker & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.823/2018, decided on 09.08.2018 was referred to and finally, it was decided as below:-

^ ^2- iz'kklfud fLFkfr & 2-1 nLrkost lR;kiu esa vuqifLFkr ,oa vik= vH;fFkZ;ksa ds dkj.k fjDr jgs inksa ij ,d ckj p;u fj'kQy fd;s tkus ds mijkar p;u dks ckj&ckj fj'kQy fd;k tkuk fof/k vuqlkj mi;qDr] rdZlaxr o O;kogkfjd ugha gSA p;u fj'kQy ds mijkar vH;fFkZ;ksa dh esfjV vixszM gksrh gS bl dkj.k iwoZ esa dk;Zxzg.k dj pqds vH;fFkZ;ksa dk ftyk ,oa p;u oxZ ifjorZu gksrk gS blls iz'kklfud o O;kogkfjd dfBukbZ;ka mRiUu gksrh gSA

2-2 ftyk ifjorZu esa iwoZ esa dk;Zxzg.k dj pqds vH;fFkZ;ksa