2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 8643
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
BHANWAR LAL YADAV S/O SHRI JAGDISH YADAV – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 19137 / 2022
[2026:RJ-JP:6221]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19137/2022
1. Bhanwar Lal Yadav S/o Shri Jagdish Yadav, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vill Mundiya, Tehsil Pipplu District Tonk (Raj.).
2. Ram Kishan Vyas S/o Shri Jagdish Vyas, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Deori, Po Khohlya, Tehsil Uniara, District Tonk (Raj.).
3. Raju Soni S/o Shri Durga Lal Soni, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Chhota Takhta, Telyo Ki Gali, District Tonk (Raj.).
4. Dinesh Kmar Chouhdary S/o Shri Chanda Lal, Aged About
48 Years, R/o Raghunath Puri, Badatakhta, District Tonk (Raj.).
5. Mohd. Aqib S/o Shri Ahmed Miyan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Maliyon Ki Gali, Aliganj Bawdi, District Tonk (Raj.).
6. Mohemmed Asrar S/o Shri Muzaffar Salim, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Forest Waley Mohalla Qafla, Near Masjid Ghole, Tonk (Raj.).
7. Sunil Kumar Mehra S/o Shri Prem Kumar Mehra, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Dhanna Talai, Kante Ke Samne, Tonk (Raj.).
8. Manoj Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Bhagwan Shay Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vill-Po Mehandwas, Tonk (Raj.).
9. Balveer Gurjar S/o Shri Ramswaroop, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Zanavi Tandio Ke Paas, Ward No. 38, Purani Tonk, Jata Padha Purani Tonk, Tonk (Raj.).
10. Ziauddin S/o Mohammaddin, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vill/po Darda Turki, Tehsil Peeplu, District Tonk, (Raj.).
11. Ramdas Sharma S/o Shri Goutam Prasad Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o V/p Kakod, Tehsil/district Tonk, (Raj.).
12. Chetan Kumar Dhobi S/o Shri Brajmohan Dhobi, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vill. Kheda, Po Ghotda, Tehsil Uniara, District Tonk (Raj.).
13. Ravindra Kumar S/o Shri Rajendra Kumar Tasera, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Gadhi Park, Geeta Mandir Ke Samne, Jaipur Road, Tonk (Raj.).
----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Depart-
ment Of Medical And Health Services, Government Secre-
tariat, Jaipur.
2. Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Members Secretary Cum Chief Medical Officer, Rajasthan Medicare Relief Society, Tonk (Raj.).
4. M/s Motherland Security And Labour Welfare Society, Through Its Proprietor, 36 Near Pansal Ring Road, Gu-
rukul Vihar, Gayatri Nagar, Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12444/2023
1. Shahbaz Khan S/o Shri Mohammad Qasim Khan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Mohalla Aliganj Boawri, Chouraha Panch Batti Road, Tonk (Raj.).
2. Mukesh Kumar Jat S/o Shri Chhitar Lal Jat, Aged About
38 Years, R/o Village Devpura Post Arniya Kedar District Tonk (Raj.).
3. Rameshwar Gurjar S/o Shri Ladu Ram Gurjar, Aged About
29 Years, R/o Village Saidabad, Ward No. 45, District Tonk (Raj.).
----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Depart-
ment Of Medical And Health Services, Government Secre-
tariat, Jaipur.
2. Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Members Secretary Cum Chief Medical Officer, Rajasthan Medicare Relief Society, Tonk (Raj.).
4. M/s Motherland Security And Labour Welfare Society, Through Its Proprietor, 36 Near Pansal Ring Road, Gu-
rukul Vihar, Gayatri Nagar, Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Jain For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sweekriti Sharma for Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Judgment / Order
10/02/2026
1 These writ petitions raises common issue, hence all are tagged together and we are disposing of them with a com-
mon order with consent of learned counsel for the parties.
2 SB CWP No. 19137/2022 is filed by petitioners with following prayer:
It is therefore, humbly and most respectfully prayed that your lordships may very graciously be pleased to admit and allow this Civil Writ Pe-
tition and further:-
i. By issuing appropriate writ order or direction, respondent may be restrained from placing the services of the petitioners under placement agency instead of Rajasthan Medicare Relief So- ciety and respondent may further be directed to continue with the services of the petitioners. ii. ii. By