The court held that all contractual employees appointed before the enforcement of the Rules must be considered under Rule 3, ensuring equitable treatment based on established criteria.

ORDER :

1. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue rests covered by the Division Bench judgment in Radu Lal & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11737/2024 and other connected matters (decided on 26.08.2025).

2. Counsel relied upon a judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Rakesh Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12679/2020 and other connected matters (decided on 17.10.2025) whereby while relying upon Radu Lal (supra), the Court passed certain directions.

3. Counsel for the respondents submits that similar directions as in Rakesh Kumar (supra) be passed in the present writ petitions too.

4. In Radu Lal (supra), the Court directed as under:

“42. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are allowed in the following terms :

(i) The respondents shall consider the individual case of each contractual employee, appointed prior to enforcement of the Rules of 2022 strictly in accordance with Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, meaning thereby, that if an employee has been appointed on a post created by the Administrative Department with the concurrence of the Finance Department and the appointment has been through issuance of a public advertisement further without there being any differentiation whether the public advertisement has been issued by the State Government or by the placement agency.

(ii) If the case of the individual is in conformation with the Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, as interpreted above, then the benefit of the Rules of 2022 shall be extended to such petitioners.”

5. In Rakesh Kumar (supra), the Court while deciding the petitions in terms of Radu Lal (supra), further directed as under:

“5. Keeping in mind the law enunciated in the order passed in Rodu Lal (supra), the present writ petitions are also allowed in the same terms and manner as laid down therein. However, it is observed that the appointment letters of certain petitioners have either not been brought on record or are not annexed with their respective writ petitions. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to verify the authenticity and existence of such appointment letters prior to giving effect to this order.

5.1. The entire process of verification, wherever necessary, shall be completed by the respondents within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon completion of such verification, if it is found that the petitioners are similarly situated and their cases are identical to those covered under the decision in Rodu Lal (supra), they shall be extended the same benefits and consequential reliefs without any further delay.

5.2. The stay petitions and all pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.”

6. In view of the above, the present writ petitions are disposed of on the same terms and directions as in Rakesh Kumar (supra).

7. Stay petitions and pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.