[2026:RJ-JP:2290]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19314/2013 Suresh Chand Sharma S/o Laxmi Narain Sharma, R/o Village &

Post Chunabhati, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan).

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director D.I.B., Jaipur.

3. The Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Jhalawar (Rajasthan).

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Gayatri Rathore, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Ran Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Choudhary with Ms. Pooja Dixit on behalf of Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG Mr. Yadvendra Patel HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

19/01/2026

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

"It is, therefore; most humbly prayed that your Lordship be pleased to accept/allow this writ petition and further this Hon'ble Court be pleased to:-

i. direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of sweeper from the date his similarly situated persons given appointment with all consequential benefits.

ii. pass any other order, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner."

2. It is submitted by learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner that despite the fact that after undergoing the recruitment process for the post of 'Safai Karamchari', name of petitioner was shown at serial No.7 in final selection list dated 30.07.2013, appointment was not given to the petitioner for no cogent reasons, whereas the similarly situated person, Sh. Rajesh Kumar, has been given appointment vide order dated 13.10.2014.

3. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner further submits that after filing of the writ petition and during the pendency of the same, although appointment order dated 23.11.2022 has been issued to appoint the petitioner on the post of 'Safai Karamchari', yet the benefits have been given from the date of joining pursuant to such appointment order dated

23.11.2022.

4. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner also submits that when a similarly situated person admittedly was granted benefit of appointment in the year 2014, for no justified reasons, the petitioner can be deprived of his rights for as many as 8 years, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for the benefits from the date on which similarly situated person has been granted such appointment.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as per the prevailing circular, as the petitioner was from 'General' category and only the candidates belonging to SC (Valmiki Samaj) were to be appointed on the post of Safai Karamchari, however, some time has lapsed in removal of such hurdle at government level, therefore, for administrative reasons, delay has occurred in this matter, which is bonafide.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Perusal of order dated 13.10.2014 would reveal that one Sh. Rajesh Kumar S/o Dayaram Sharma, who also belongs to 'General' category was given appointment by the respondents, therefore, no proper justification has come forward for denying such benefit to the petitioner at the relevant time treating him to be a member of 'General' category.

8. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that name of Sh. Rajesh Kumar was similarly situated person qua the petitioner. Under these circumstances, if it so depriving the petitioner of his legitimate rights for as many as 8 years could not be justified by the respondents. It is settled preposition of law that adopting two different yardsticks for granting benefits to similarly situated persons is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

9. Hence, under these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to submit a representation for claiming notional benefits from the date on which appointment has been given to similarly situated person, Sh. Rajesh Kumar and such r