SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 15027

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR
FARAS DAN CHARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 5277 / 2026



##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:23170]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5277/2026

Faras Dan Charan S/o Shri Laxmi Dan, Aged About 47 Years,

Resident Of Dhelari Tehsil Desuri District Pali Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,

Medical And Health Department, Government Of

Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Mission Director (Nhm), Directorate Of Medical Health

And Family Welfare Services, Swasthya Bhawan, C-

Scheme, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

3. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services,

Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg,

Jaipur.

4. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health

Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan,

Jaipur.

5. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of

Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

6. The Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of

Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

7. The Secretary, General Administration Department,

Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripudaman Singh

For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

14/05/2026

1. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

matter has been heard for final disposal at the admission stage

itself.

(Uploaded on 15/05/2026 at 08:59:27 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/05/2026 at 01:20:58 AM)

##PAGE2##

[2026:RJ-JD:23170] (2 of 3) [CW-5277/2026]

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

the facts in the present case is similar to the facts in D.B. Civil

Writ Petition No. 11737/2024 (Rodu Lal & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors.), decided on 26.08.2025.

3. The relevant paragraphs of the order dated 26.08.2025

passed in the case of Rodu Lal (Supra) reads as follows:-

“41. In light of the aforesaid facts & findings and the

judgments, this Court is of the opinion that Rule 3 of the Rules

of 2022 has to be read harmoniously, whereby, the petitioners

and similarly situated persons, who have been appointed

through placement agency after issuance of public

advertisement are to be covered under the ambit of Rule 3 of

the Rules of 2022. Since, the above rule has been read

harmoniously in favour of the petitioners, therefore, there is

no requirement to decide question No. (b), which was framed

under para 13. The harmonious reading of the Rule itself

clarifies that, there ought to be no discrimination between the

contractual employees appointed through placement agency

as well as the contractual employees appointed directly.

42. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are allowed in

the following terms: (i) The respondents shall consider the

individual case of each contractual employee, appointed prior

to enforcement of the Rules of 2022 strictly in accordance with

Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, meaning thereby, that if an

employee has been appointed on a post created by the

Administrative Department with the concurrence of the

Finance Department and the appointment has been through

issuance of a public advertisement further without there being

any differentiation whether the public advertisement has been

issued by the State Government or by the placement agency.

(ii) If the case of the individual is in conformation with the

Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022, as interpreted above, then the

benefit of the Rules of 2022 shall be extended to such

petitioners.

43. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.”

4. In light of the order cited above, the present writ petition is

disposed of in the same terms as in the case of Rodu Lal & Ors.

(supra). The petitioner shall be at liberty to make a

representation before the concerned authorities within a period of

(Uploaded on 15/05/2026 at 08:59:27 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/05/2026 at 01:20:58 AM)

##PAGE3##

[2026:RJ-JD:23170] (3 of 3) [CW-5277/2026]

15 days. On such representation, the concerned authorities are

directed to dispose of the same in light of the decision passed in

case of Rodu Lal within a period of two months from the date of

receipt of this order.

5. All the pending ap

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top