SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 2722

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, SANDEEP SHAH
DINESH KUMAR SONI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 18813 / 2025



[2026:RJ-JD:1051-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18813/2025

1. Dinesh Kumar Soni S/o Devilal Soni, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Vpo Sajjangarh, Tehsil Sajjangarh, District Banswara (Raj.) (Posted As Block Coordinator Under Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin), At Panchayat Samiti, Sajjangarh - Date Of Appointment 04.10.2010).

2. Shrawan Kumar S/o Himmat Lal Chanana, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Khunta Chandan, Post Anandpuri, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara (Raj.). (Posted As Block Coordinator Under Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen), At Panchayat Samiti, Anandpuri -Date Of Appointment

04.10.2010).

3. Nitesh Chandra Dwivedi S/o Ramanlal Dwivedi, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Vpo Naugama, Tehsil Bagidora, District Banswara, Rajasthan (Presently Working As Block Coordinator Under Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen), At Panchayat Samiti, Bagidora -Date Of Appointment-

04.10.2010).

4. Rakesh Kumar Kalal S/o Praveen Chandra Kalal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Khandu Colony, Tehsil And District Banswara, Rajasthan (Presently Working As Block Coordinator Under Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen), At Panchayat Samiti, Banswara- -Date Of Appointment-

19.10.2021).

5. Deepak Bhatt S/o Mahesh Chandra Bhatt, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Vpo Anjana, Tehsil Arthuna, District Banswara, Rajasthan (Presently Working As Block Coordinator Under Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen), At Panchayat Samiti, Garhi- -Date Of Appointment- 15.04.2011).

6. Mohit Patidar S/o Mahipal Patidar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Kotra, Tehsil Arthuna, District Banswara, Rajasthan (Presently Working As Block Coordinator Under Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen), At Panchayat Samiti, Arthuna- -Date Of Appointment- 18.11.2017).

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. The Director, Clean Indian Mission (Rural) (Swachh Bharat Mission), Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

5. The District Collector, Banswara.

6. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Banswara.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Singh Rathore.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Bharti, for Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG.

Mr. Harshvardhan Singh, for Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH

Order

09/01/2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be permitted to file representation in light of the order dated 26.08.2025 passed by Co-Ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble 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.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents are agreeable to the proposition and submit that the representation shall be decided in light of the decision rendered in Rodu Lal’s case (supra).

3. The operative portion of the order dated 26.08.2025 (supra)

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top