HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4324/2015 Versi Ram ----Petitioner Versus State Of Raj. And Ors.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Raj Paliwal, GC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

Order

17/03/2026

1. By way of filing the present Writ Petition, the petitioner has made the following prayers:-

“1. The respondents-authorities may very kindly be directed to promote the petitioner on the post of Land Revenue Inspector forthwith with all consequential benefits;

2. The respondents may further very kindly be directed to release benefit of selection-scale upon completion of 18 years services to the petitioner with effect from 11.10.2011;

3. Any other writ, order or direction which your Lordship may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner;”

2. Explaining the brief facts of the present case, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed as a Patwari vide order dated 07.10.1993. While serving as Patwari in District Jalore, the petitioner was served with a chargesheet initiating a departmental enquiry, which culminated in an order dated 31.12.2007, whereby a penalty of withheld of one annual increment without cumulative effect was imposed upon the petitioner.

3. Upon completion of 18 years of service, the petitioner became entitled to the benefit of Assured Career Progression (ACP); however, on account of the penalty of withholding of one annual increment, the said benefit was deferred by one year. Consequently, the increment was granted to the petitioner on

11.10.2012 instead of 11.10.2011.

4. Accordingly, the petitioner fell within the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Land Revenue Inspector; however, he was not granted promotion against the vacancies for the year 2014–15.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of the penalty order dated 31.12.2007, the benefit of Second Selection Grade was initially deferred by one year and consequently granted in the year 2012 instead of 2011. It is further contended that, thereafter, on the very same ground, the petitioner was also denied the benefit of promotion, which amounts to subjecting the petitioner to double jeopardy.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10986/2024; Tejpal Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. wherein, while relying upon the judgment dated 23.11.2020 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10939/2020; Ram Singh Rao vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., the writ petition was allowed and the respondents were directed to convene a review DPC for the year 2014–15 and to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of ILR.

7. The factual averments made in the writ petition, duly supported by documents, have not been disputed by learned counsel for the respondents; however, it is contended that in view of the penalty order dated 31.12.2007, the petitioner was not rightly considered for promotion against the vacancies to the post of ILR for the year 2014–15.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

9. Admittedly, the petitioner was initially appointed as Patwari vide order dated 01.10.1993 and, upon completion of 18 years of continuous service, became entitled to the benefit of ACP in the year 2011. However, on account of the penalty of withholding of one annual increment without cumulative effect, the said benefit was granted to the petitioner with effect from 11.10.2012. Thereafter, although the petitioner was otherwise eligible for promotion to the post of ILR against the vacancies for the year 2014–15, he was not considered on account of the said penalty order dated 31.12.2007, and persons junior to him were promoted.

10. Apparently, the present case reflects a situation of double jeopardy, inasmuch as, on o