Order

BY THE COURT:-

1. The present Civil Writ Petition has been instituted by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India laying challenge to the order dated 02.05.2025 issued by the District Election Officer, Churu, whereby the petitioner has been appointed as Booth Level Officer (BLO).

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on 07.02.2017 as Physical Training Instructor Grade-III and, thereafter, joined duties on 20.12.2022 at Government Senior Secondary School, Ogala, Barmer. Subsequently, the petitioner came to be posted at the School Sports Association Centre, Churu i.e. Government Gopiram Goenka Senior Secondary School, District Churu. Thereafter, vide order dated 02.05.2025, the petitioner was appointed as Booth Level Officer (BLO) for Booth No.135 of Churu Constituency.

2.1. It is contended that the petitioner, being a Physical Training Instructor, could not have been assigned non-educational duties in view of Section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. It is further averred that the petitioner is not an enrolled voter of Booth No.135 and, therefore, was ineligible for appointment as BLO for the said booth. The impugned appointment is alleged to be contrary to the directions and guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India as well as other governmental instructions governing appointment of Booth Level Officers. Being aggrieved by the order dated 02.05.2025, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the assignment of duties of Booth Level Officer to the petitioner is wholly impermissible in law inasmuch as the petitioner is serving as a Physical Training Instructor and is, therefore, protected under Section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 from being deployed for non-educational functions. It was further contended that the petitioner is not an elector of Booth No.135 of Churu Constituency and consequently could not have been validly appointed as Booth Level Officer for the said booth. Learned counsel further argued that the impugned order runs contrary to the circulars and administrative instructions issued by the educational authorities and the Election Commission of India governing appointment of Booth Level Officers.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the controversy involved in the present petition is no longer res integra and stands squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Tulsi Ram Musiya Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 09.12.2024 in SBCWP No.4962/2024, wherein identical contentions came to be negatived. It was argued that the departmental circulars themselves carve out an exception permitting assignment of duties connected with elections and, therefore, no illegality can be attributed to the appointment of the petitioner as Booth Level Officer.

5. I have bestowed my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions advanced at the Bar and have carefully perused the material available on record as well as the order impugned herein.

6. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in Tulsi Ram Musiya Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 09.12.2024 in SBCWP No.4962/2024 along with connected matter, while dealing with an identical controversy concerning appointment of teachers as Booth Level Officers, has elaborately considered the scope of the circulars dated 18.10.2011 and 21.06.2012 issued by the Education Department and observed as under:-

1. Both these writ petitions involve identical facts and common grievances, hence they are being decided conjointly by the present common order; however, the facts of SBCWP No. 4962/2024 : Tulsi Ram Musi