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) 15639

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
SUNIL KUMAR JAIN S/O SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 7933 / 2026



##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:20437]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7933/2026

Sunil Kumar Jain S/o Shri Shikhar Chand Jain, Aged About 59

Years, R/o 3/324 Kala Kua, Aravali Vihar, Housing Board, Alwar

(Raj.)

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Rural

Development And Panchayati Raj Department,

Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personel

Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

3. The Director, Rural Development And Panchyati Raj

Department (National Rural Employment Program),

Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)

4. The Additional District Programme Coordinator And Chief

Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar (Raj.).

5. The District Collector-Cum District Programme

Coordinator,(Egs), Alwar (Raj.).

6. The Development Officer-Cum-Programme Coordinator,

Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajender Prasad Gautam

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prateek Saxena, AAAG for

Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

12/05/2026

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with

following prayer:-

“It is therefore, humbly and respectfully prayed that

this writ petition of the petitioner may kindly be

allowed and by an appropriate writ order or direction:

(Uploaded on 20/05/2026 at 01:21:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 21/05/2026 at 04:26:27 AM)

##PAGE2##

[2026:RJ-JP:20437] (2 of 8) [CW-7933/2026]

(A) the action of the respondents while not

extending the services of the petitioner upto 65 years

of age and terminating services of the petitioner on

dated 01.07.2026 despite the fact that the aspirants

of 65 years of age are being considered for

continuing on contractual appointment, may kindly be

declared per se illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the

provisions of Constitution of India and thus,

respondents may kindly be directed to not

terminating service of the petitioner on dated

01.07.2026 on account of he attains age 60 years.

(B) The respondents may kindly be directed to

extend the contractual services of the petitioner upto

65 years of age and permit him to continue his

services on the post of Jr. Technical Assistant in

Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar till he

attains the age of 65 years.

(C) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction

which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper

in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly

be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

initially, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Junior

Technical Assistant under the NREGA Scheme vide order dated

26.03.2008 on a contractual basis, and he joined his duties at

Panchayat Samiti Laxmangarh, Alwar. Counsel further submits that

at the time of his initial appointment, the petitioner was 42 years

of age and has rendered contractual services in the respondent

Department for a period of about 18 years. It is further submitted

that the petitioner is going to attain the age of 60 years on

01.07.2026.

3. Learned counsel further submits that the maximum age

prescribed for a Junior Technical Assistant is 65 years and there

exists a provision for extension of services of a Junior Technical

Assistant up to the age of 65 years. Since the petitioner was going

(Uploaded on 20/05/2026 at 01:21:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 21/05/2026 at 04:26:27 AM)

##PAGE3##

[2026:RJ-JP:20437] (3 of 8) [CW-7933/2026]

to attain the age of 60 years, he submitted a request before the

respondent-Department seeking extension of his contractual

services on the post of Junior Technical Assistant up to the age of

65 years. However, no heed was paid by the respondent-

Department to the request made by the petitioner for extension of

his services with effect from 01.07.2026 upon his attaining the

age of 60 years.

4. Learned counsel further submits that the action of the

respondent-Department is wholly illegal and arbitrary, inasmuch

as candidates up to the maximum age of 65 years are being

consi

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