Conditions requiring repayment of salary for services rendered are void and cannot be enforced, while recovery of training expenses is permissible.

ORDER :

1. Since the common question of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, hence, all these matters are taken up together for final disposal and the same are being decided by this common order.

2. For the sake of convenience, the facts narrated in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14531/2023 has been taken into consideration.

3. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

“(I) The record of the case may kindly be called for;

(II) The respondent No.03 may kindly be directed to relieve the petitioner from the post of Constable to join on the post of PTI without insisting him for payment of refund of training expenses/salary.

(III) The by order or direction this Hon’ble Court may awarded all the service benefits to the petitioner.

(IV) The petitioner may be granted for all consequential benefits;

(V) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which the facts and circumstances of the case warrants be issued and;

(VI) Costs of the writ petition be allowed in favour of the petitioner.”

4. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the respondents to relieve the petitioner from the post of Constable in order to join the post of Physical Training Instructor without insisting him to refund the payment of training expenses/salary.

5. At the outset, it has been brought into the notice of this Court that the controversy involved in this writ petition has already been set at rest by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat at Jodhpur in the case of Karanjeet Singh Versus State of Rajasthan & Others while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12930/2020. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that while deciding the matter of Karanjeet Singh (supra), the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has directed the respondents to determine the amount of expenses incurred on the training of the petitioner and recover the same from the petitioner but so far as the withdrawal of the salary is concerned during the course of employment by the petitioner, the respondents have been restrained to recover the same from him.

6. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid order was assailed by the State by way of filing an appeal before the Division Bench in the case of State of Rajasthan & Others Versus Vinod Kumar Meena & Another, D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.61/2024, whereby the Division Bench has upheld the view taken by the Single Bench. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, instant writ petitions be disposed of in the light of similar directions issued in the case of Karanjeet Singh (supra).

7. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

8. Perusal of the record indicates that the issue involved in this petition has already been set at rest by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Arun Choudhary & Others Versus State & Others while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5255/2013 with the following observations and directions:-

“Having regard to the facts aforesaid especially the latest judgment of the coordinate bench rendered at Principal Seat in Bhanwar Lal vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8934/2013 decided on 28.1.2014, the present petitions deserve to be disposed of with direction that if the petitioners have already deposited the amount of training expenses as per the circular of the Director General of Police dated 30.9.2008, the respondent Education‐Department shall release their salary. The fact about the deposit of the training expenses shall be verified by the concerned Superintendent of Police on the petitioners' approaching him along with copy of this order, who shall have the training expenses computed as per the aforesaid circular dated 30.9.2008. On NOC being issued by him, the Education Department shall release the salary of the petitioners. It is further directed that if any amount in excess is found to have been deposited by the petitioners or re