[2026:RJ-JD:4083]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14060/2017 Amit Gaur Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash Gaur, Resident Of Village 3-H/9, University Staff Colony, New Campus Road, Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Jai Narayan Vyas University Jodhpur Through Its Registrar, Establishment Branch, Jodhpur.

2. Assistant Registrar, Establishment Branch, Jai Narayan Vyas University Jodhpur.

3. Head Of Department Of Physics Department, Jnvu Jodhpur.

4. Vice Chancellor, Jai Narayan Vyas University Jodhpur.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.J. Punia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinay Jain with Mr. Darshan Jain HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

22/01/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of order dated 28.10.2017 (Annexure-4) whereby the petitioner was afforded compassionate appointment on the post of ‘Lower Division Clerk’ (LDC) at a fixed pay of Rs.8910/- during the probation period of two years.

2. No reply to the writ petition has been filed. Vide order dated 12.11.2024, last opportunity to file the reply was granted subject to payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-. Despite the same, the reply was not filed and on 20.02.2025, the Court directed for listing the matter for arguments subject to payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-. However, till date, neither the cost has been deposited nor has the reply been filed. The Court therefore proceeded on to hear the matter finally.

3. The facts are that petitioner’s father who was an employee of the respondent University, expired on 27.08.2016. The petitioner therefore applied for compassionate appointment. Vide order dated 05.10.2016 (Annexure-3), he was afforded compassionate appointment on the post of ‘Lab Assistant’, however, at a fixed pay of Rs.11820/- during the probation period of two years.

4. Vide order impugned dated 28.10.2017, order dated 05.10.2016 stood amended and vide the same, petitioner was re-appointed on the post of LDC, again on probation and on a fixed pay of Rs.8910/- per month.

5. After hearing the counsels, this Court is of the clear opinion that order dated 28.10.2017 (Annexure-4) is on the face of it, arbitrary, erroneous and illegal. Firstly, no reason whatsoever has been assigned as to why the petitioner who had worked almost for a year on the post of ‘Lab Assistant’ was re-appointed and that too, on the post of ‘LDC’. Secondly, Counsel for the respondents could not point out any provision of law/Regulation/Rule which empowers the Vice Chancellor of the University to pass any order whereby a person can be re-appointed and that too, on some different post. Thirdly, it is incomprehensible as to how the pay on which the petitioner was appointed vide order dated 05.10.2016 was reduced vide order impugned dated 28.10.2017. Fourthly, after completion of one year of service, how the petitioner could have been appointed again on probation for a period of two years, is also incomprehensible. Lastly, there is nothing available on record to suggest that any opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner before order impugned been passed.

6. In view of the above reasons, order dated 28.10.2017 (Annexure-4) being totally illegal and dehors the basic provisions of law, is hereby quashed and set aside.

7. The petitioner shall be entitled to continue to work on the post of ‘Lab Assistant’ in pursuance to order dated 05.10.2016 and would be entitled to all the consequential benefits arising out of the same.

8. The writ petition stands allowed

9. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of (REKHA BORANA),J

21-Mak/-