[2025:RJ-JD:53910]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23915/2025

1. Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Prahlad Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Vishnoi Ka Bash, Khetolai, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

2. Sohan Lal S/o Shri Surata Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Vishnoi Ka Bash, Khetolai, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

3. Manish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Bhati Lal Sharma, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Ward No 13, Bhaskar Mohalla, Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

4. Hajoor Bax S/o Shri Neku Khan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Post Eka, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

5. Mool Raj Singh Bhati S/o Shri Megraj Singh, Aged About

32 Years, R/o Ward No 6, Ajasar, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

6. Jamal Deen S/o Shri Gopal Khan, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Post Sadrasar, Sankra, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

7. Kurban Ali S/o Shri Jamal Khan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Musalamano Ki Basti, Fatehgarh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

8. Durg Singh Bhati S/o Shri Mahadan Singh Bhati, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Poonam Nagar, Habur, Districtjaisalmer, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Medical & Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Mission Director (NHM), Directorate Of Medical Health & Family Welfare Services, Swasthya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

3. The Director (Public Health), Medical & Health Services, Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

4. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical & Health Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.

Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

7. The Secretary, General Administration Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

8. Chief Medical & Health Officer, Jaisalmer, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ratana Ram For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tanuj Jain for Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

Order

15/12/2025

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties jointly submit that the facts in the present cases are similar to the facts involved in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11737/24 (Rodu Lal and Ors vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) dated 26.08.2025.

2. The relevant paragraphs of the order dated 26.08.2025 passed in the case of Rodu Lal (Supra) reads as follows:

"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 petitions are allowed inthe 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.

43. All pending applications