[2025:RJ-JD:52970]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23699/2025

1. Kalee Charan Meena D/o Shri Ganesh Lal Meena, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Gopalpura Bamori, Post Dhamotar, Tehsil And District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

2. Ram Singh D/o Shri Nagendra Singh Meena, Aged About

50 Years, R/o Chhota Majesariya Post Sidhpura, Tehsil And District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

3. Kailash Chandra Meena S/o Shri Bagdi Ram Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Talab Fala, Post Dhariya Khedi Tehsil Suhagpura, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

4. Shanta Meena W/o Shri Pratap Singh Maida, Aged About

40 Years, R/o Movai Pada, Ghantali, Tehsil Peepalkhunt District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

5. Dilip Kumar Meena S/o Shri Rakma Meena, Aged About

35 Years, R/o Nai Aabadi, Salamgarh, Tehsil Dalot, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

6. Mangilal Meena S/o ShriKaru Lal Meena, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Lalgarh, Tehsil Aarnod, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

7. Manilal Damor S/o Shri Dev Ji Damor, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Aankliya Fala, Post Gandhva Pal Tehsil Simalwada, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan.

8. Devanand Meena W/o Shri Bhagat Meena, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Gopalpura, Post Sidhpura, Tehsil And District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Personnel (A-Ii) Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Secretary, Tribal Area Development (Tad), Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. Commissioner, Tribal Area Development (Tad), Department, Udaipur.

4. Director, Swach Pari Yojana, Udaipur.

5. Project Officer, Swach Pari Yojana, Pratapgarh.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Chaudhary Mr. Ram Dev Potalia HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

Order

06/12/2025

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the respondent authorities for not passing any order on the representation filed by the petitioners whereunder they have requested to consider their case for covering the Contractual Hiring To Civil Posts Rules, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2022’).

2. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners were recruited by direct contract through the outsourcing agency and their case is also covered by the order dated 26.08.2025 passed by Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11737/2024 titled as Rodu Lal & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. and connected batch of petitions.

3. The operative portion of the order dated 26.08.2025 reads as follows:

“40. This Court is further of the firm opinion that if the respondents continue with the services of the petitioners, without covering them under the Rules of 2022 would be against the principles as enumerated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a catena of judgments wherein the Court has opined that the practice of appointment of contractual employees without any rules would lead to a situation of exploitation by the employer. With this intent only, the Rules of 2022 have been framed and therefore, the benefit of the said rules cannot be denied to the petitioners and similarly situated persons merely on the count of having been appointed through placement agency.

41. In light of the aforesaid facts & findings and the judgments, this Court is of the opinion that Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022 has to be read harmoniously, whereby, the petitioners and similarly situated persons, who have been appointed through placement agency after issuance of public advertisement are to be covered under the ambit of Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022. Since, the above rule has been read harmoniously in favour of the petitioners, therefore, there is no requirement to decide question No.

(b), which was framed under para 13. The harmonious reading of the Rule itself clarifies that, there ought to be no discrimination between the contractual employees appointed through placement agency as well as the contractual employees appointed directly.

42. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition