Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ANAND SHARMA
Rakesh Saini S/o Sh. Jagdish Prasad Saini – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANAND SHARMA, J.
1. This batch of writ petitions has been filed by the petitioners invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the matters relating to recruitment on the post of Class-IV Employees initiated vide advertisement dated 31.12.2010. With the consent of parties, all the writ petitions were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment in following manner:
S. B. Civil Writ Petition N o. 15084/2016 :
2. In this writ petition, petitioners have laid a challenge to the provisional select list dated 14.10.2016 and the consequential appointment orders dated 27.01.2017 issued for recruitment to the posts of Class-IV Employees in the Government Secretariat, State of Rajasthan. The petitioners have also sought consequential directions for their appointment by grant of bonus marks and in the alternative, they have prayed for regularisation of their services and other ancillary reliefs.
3. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioners were engaged between the years 2003 to 2008 as Class-IV Employees/Safai Karmcharis in the Secretariat through contractors on daily wage basis. It is their case that they
Participation in a selection process without objection limits a candidate's ability to challenge the results, especially when no weightage for prior service is provided in the recruitment advertiseme....
The court ruled that employees employed for lengthy periods cannot be denied regularization of service, emphasizing principles of fairness and equality under the Constitution.
The court affirmed that irregular appointments can be considered for regularization based on length of service, regardless of procedural delays, emphasizing fairness and equitable treatment in public....
The court emphasizes that regularization of temporary employees must adhere to principles of equality and fairness, ensuring parity in treatment for similarly situated employees.
Appointments not being sponsored by the employment exchange, as prescribed under Rule 149(2) of the Rules, would only make the appointments irregular and not illegal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the impugned order rejecting the claim of regularization was not sustainable in the eyes of the law, and the respondents were directed to cons....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Petitioners' service should have been regularized as they were engaged against sanctioned posts by following due process of selection and ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
