[2025:RJ-JD:39121]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16917/2025 Dr. Mona Sood W/o Dr. Rajan Dhingra, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of C Block, Saheli Nagar, Udaipur Presently Posted As Assistant Professor (Endocrinology Specialty) (Working Since

01.12.2020) At Rnt Medical College, Udaipur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Medical Education (Group 1St) Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Joint Secretary, Medical Education (Group 1St)

Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Deputy Secretary To The Govt., Medical Education (Group 1St) Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

4. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghoogra Ghati, Ajmer.

5. Principal And Controller, Rnt Medical College, Udaipur, (Raj.).

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Y.P. Khileree.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

03/09/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner while submitting that identical writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.10538/2016 : Kaptan Singh & Ors Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. has been disposed of by Jaipur Bench of this Court, vide order dated 09.11.2017, prays that similar order be passed in the present case also.

2. Hence, identical order is being passed in the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Baser v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number

6707/2007, decided on 8th February, 2012, observing thus:

"After hearing of the matter at a considerable length, it is submitted by learned Additional Advocate General Shri R. L. Jangid that adequate number of Vacancies are available with the respondents to employee meritorious candidates, as a consequent of process of selection initiated under the Advertisement Annx-1. It is also pointed out that in a matter of similar nature i.e. SB Civil Writ Petition no.3414/2009 this court directed to employ persons who approached court without making any disturbance with the appointments already given.

Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case I deem it appropriate to accept the petition for writ with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for the post for which they applied under the advertisement Anx-1, if they are otherwise eligible and meritorious. The appointment to the petitioners may be given from the date appointments were to other persons as a consequent to the process of selection in question. The seniority and all other benefits including fixation of pay on notional basis in the event of grant of appointment shall be reckoned from the date appointments were given to other persons selected through same process. However they shall not be entitled for actual payment of wages for the period concerned. Necessary orders for compliance of the directions given are required to be passed by the respondents on or before

31.3.2012."

4. Learned counsel further asserted that despite repeated representations addressed by the petitioner, the respondents have not responded to the claim of the petitioner.

5. It is further pointed out that for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide her representation within a time frame, in the backdrop of the adjudication in the case of Ashok Kumar Baser (supra).

6. In view of the limited prayer addressed; the petitioner is directed to address a representation enclosing copies of the opinions, which she intend to refer to and rely upon so also a copy of the notice for demand of justice addressed to the counsel within two weeks hereinafter.

7. In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the State-respondents are directed to con