HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Arun Bhansali, J.
Dinesh Kumar Suman – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11052/2022
Decided On : 04-08-2022
Res Judicata - Appointment Dispute - The court held that candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier. The petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such a situation and their writ petition was not barred either as res judicata or as being improperly constituted. The respondents were directed to treat the petitioners senior to respondents who were in lower order of merit.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought relief for appointment dispute, claiming entitlement to the same benefits as candidates who stood lower in merit due to delayed appointments.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the writ petition, requiring the petitioners to make a representation to the Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, who would consider and decide the same within three months, addressing the grievance of the petitioners for extending them the relief as prayed for.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to the same benefits as candidates who stood lower in merit due to delayed appointments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier. The petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such a situation and their writ petition was not barred either as res judicata or as being improperly constituted.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to treat the petitioners senior to respondents who were in lower order of merit and required the petitioners to make a representation to the Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, for consideration and decision within three months.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking relief as indicated in the writ petition.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners 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, and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled to the same relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and Krishan Lal (supra).
3. In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of with the similar directions as given in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra), which read as under:-
"This Court in Suman Bai and Another v. State and Others - 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, held that candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached court earlier. Petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such situation and their writ petition not barred either as res judicata or as being him in properly constituted. This directed the respondents to treat petitioners senior to respondents, who were in lower order of merit.
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."
4. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
Candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier. Fresh cause of action for approaching in such a situation.
Candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier. Petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such situation and their wri....
Candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier.
The principle of res judicata and entitlement to appointment benefits and seniority.
Candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier. Petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such situation and their wri....
Candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier.
Candidates are entitled to service benefits based on merit, and delays by authorities cannot deprive them of their rightful claims.
The court's decision was based on the principle that candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier, and that petitioners had a fresh c....
Candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached the court earlier. Notional benefits may be granted based on the judgment if found applicable.
Candidates in lower merit positions may receive benefits if delays in appointments are attributable to state authorities, provided they follow due process.
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.