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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 4016

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ANAND SHARMA
DR PANKAJ BANSAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE MEDICALAND AND HEALTHORS – Respondent
CW / 9136 / 2013



##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:4595]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9136/2013

Dr. Pankaj Bansal aged about 25 years Son Of Shri Chaman Lal

Bansal, R/o Shop No. 29, Radhey Krishna Art Gallery, Peer Baba

Road, Baltana District SAS Nagar (Punjab).

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Medical

And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan,

Secretariat, Jaipur

2. Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services,

Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur

3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Barmer

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC with

Mr. Devraj Saini, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

28/01/2026

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with

following prayers:-

“It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon’ble Court may

call for the entire record concerning the case and by

issuing writ, order or direction or in the nature

thereof;

(i) the period of joining as Medical Officer (Dental)

of the petitioner be extended till he completes his

PG studies i.e. upto June 2015 and the earlier

joining submitted by the petitioner on

06/07.05.2013 be treated as nonest; with all

consequential benefits;

(ii) if during the pendency of writ petition, the

appointment granted to the petitioner on the post

of Medical Officer (Dental) is cancelled, the same be

(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 05:28:01 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 08:09:57 AM)

##PAGE2##

[2026:RJ-JP:4595] (2 of 3) [CW-9136/2013]

also considered and quashed, with all consequential

benefits to the petitioner;

(iii) any other order or direction as may be deemed

fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the

case may also be passed in favour of humble

petitioner.

(iv) cost of this writ petition may also be awarded

in favour of humble petitioner.”

2. Both learned counsel for the parties are in agreement

that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is

squarely covered by the order dated 07.09.2016 passed in a batch

of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10669/2013 (Dr.

Rekha Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.), in which

following directions were given:-

“Taking into consideration the facts and the Rules

referred to above, I am of the opinion that the

respondents should have considered case of the

petitioners for grant of study leave as their

admission in PG course was after entering into

service. The embargo to complete three years

service before seeking study leave would not apply

to the petitioners being probationers thus cannot

be considered to be temporary employees.

Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed.

The respondents are directed to grant study leave

as per Rules 110 and 122 of the Rules for a period

of 36 months, i.e., the period of PG Course. On

completion of the course, petitioners be allowed to

join the post. The petitioners would, however,

furnish an undertaking along with a bond of Rs.10

lac each to the effect that after completion of PG

course they will serve the government for a

minimum period of five years.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during

the pendency of writ petition, petitioner has already completed his

studies in post graduate degree in dental and thereafter, he has

been regularly discharging duties in respondent-department. This

(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 05:28:01 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 08:09:57 AM)

##PAGE3##

[2026:RJ-JP:4595] (3 of 3) [CW-9136/2013]

fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for the

respondents.

4. In the light of above, where the controversy is no

longer res-integra, the writ petition is disposed of in the light of

above order dated 07.09.2016 passed in the case of Dr. Rekha

Meena (Supra) and it is further directed that the petitioner shall

be entitled for benefit of study leave as prayed by him and the

higher qualification acquired by him shall also be entered into in

his service record by the respondents, which shall be taken into

consideration for all the service benefits.

5. The writ pet

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top