[2025:RJ-JP:36876]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16513/2017 Gopal Singh Yadav S/o Shri Kishori Lal Yadav, aged about 42 years R/o Village Kali Pahari, Post Rampur, Bansur, Alwar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Director, Primary Education, Bikaner.

3. District Education Officer, Primary Education-I, Alwar.

4. President, School Development and Management Committee through Principal Diwan Aadarsh Govt. Senior, Hajipur Bansur, Alwar.

5. Poonam Yadav D/o Sh. Gajraj Singh Yadav W/o Sh.

Rajkumar Yadav, aged about 38 years, R/o Balba ka Bas, Posts-Rampur, Bansur, Aflwar.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Punit Singhvi with Ms. Sharddha Mehta &

Mr. Mihir Jangid For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC Mr. Dheeraj Tripathi, AGC Mr. Vishwas Saini on behalf of Mr. Mananjay Singh Rathore HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

11/09/2025

1. Although the matter is listed on application for early listing, however, with the consent of the parties, the matter was heard finally.

2. The petitioner has filed the writ petition with the following prayers:

"A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to execute the selection list dated 18.02.2017 and accord permission to the petitioner to give joining as Gram Panchayat Sahayak, Gram Panchayat Sabalpura.

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to release all the pay and perk admissible to the Gram Panchayat Sahayak forthwith and further, restrain the respondents not to initiate any adverse order against the petitioner.

C. By any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deems think fit and proper be pass in favour of the petitioner.

D. Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner."

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has finally been selected and was also recommended for appointment by the respondents, yet only on account of interim order dated 22.09.2017, whereby the parties were directed to maintain status quo with regard to appointment of the petitioner, appointment order could not be issued in his favour.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the aforesaid position and has fairly stated, that the petitioner has been recommended name of the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 for appointment to the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak.

5. In view of above consensus between the parties, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the present writ petition, with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of petitioner as well as private respondent No.5 for appointment in the light of recommendation made by the respondents vide letters dated 01.02.2017 & 23.03.2024 enclosed along with the reply to the writ petition.

6. Necessary orders be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/65