[2026:RJ-JD:2662]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17757/2025 Surendra Sharma S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Sherpura, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Gramin Vikas And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Zila Parishad, Hanumangarh Through Its Executive Officer.

3. Panchayat Samiti Hanumangarh, Through Its Development Officer.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Patel For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Bharti for Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

16/01/2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy in question rests covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13204/2024: Goverdhan Kumar Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. and other connected matters (decided on

23.09.2024).

2. Learned counsel for the respondent-Department does not refute the above submission and agrees that the present issue would be covered by the said judgment.

3. In the case of Goverdhan Kumar (supra), it was observed and held as under:

“The harmonious reading of the above referred Section and Rules clearly shows that the appointing authority of the LDCs (Junior Assistant) in the respondent Department is District Establishment Committee and after the District Establishment committee selects the candidates on the post of LDCs, the seniority list is prepared by it in order of merit, thereafter, the candidates are sent to the different Panchayat Samities and Zila Parishads on the basis of the recommendations received. The Legislature has made the provision in such a fashion that theselections are made in a most transparent manner. The criteria adopted by the Legislature for selection and appointment of the LDCs by the different Panchayat Samities and Zila Parishads has been devised with a pious intention to minimize and to avoid different yardsticks in the selection process.

Looked at from another angle, if the date of appointment/joining of a candidate is taken into consideration for preparation of the seniority list, it may lead to discrepancies and chaotic/haphazard situation. For example, if a person who stood higher in the select list/merit list and was directed to join at a particular Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad, but for reasons beyond his/her control, he/she is unable to join on the given date and if a person lower in merit joins the place of posting earlier to that person, he will be given seniority above the meritorious person. For no fault of a senior person, he will loose his seniority viz-a-viz a junior person who has joined earlier despite being lower in merit. Such course of action was never intended by the legislature, therefore, the scheme of things as devised by the legislature, clearly shows that the seniority of LDC (Junior Assistant) should be assigned as per the merit list prepared by the District Establishment Committee.

In the considered opinion of this court, in order to maintain transparency and smooth functioning in the Panchayati Raj Department, the procedure of preparing the seniority list on the basis of merit has been devised.

This court is not inclined to take a different view from the view which has been taken by this court in the case of Bimla (supra). In the case of Bimla (supra), in similar set of facts, it was held that while preparing the seniority list of LDCs for promotion to the post of UDC (Senior Assistant), the respondents are required to adhere to Rule 285 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 and take into consideration merit position of a candidate while preparing the seniority list.

The operative portion of the judgment rendered by this court in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.472/2023 Bimla V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on

21.08.2024 is quoted as under:-

“8. Since the petitioner was appoint