Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 20314
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Mahender Kumar Goyal, Bhuwan Goyal, JJ
ADITYA KUMAR SHARMA SON OF SHRI JITENDRA SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
SAW 963 / 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Himanshu Jain, Rishiraj Maheshwari, Apoorva Agarwal
For the Respondents: Divyansh Mathur, Pooja Sharma, Manoj Sharma
Contractual employees appointed prior to the 2022 Rules are entitled to its benefits if the post was created with Finance Department concurrence and the appointment was made via public advertisement, regardless of whether the government or a placement agency issued the advertisement.
Headnote:(A) Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Rules of 2022 - Rule 3 - Contractual employees - Extension of benefits - Delay in preferring special appeals was condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The matter concerns the applicability of the Rules of 2022 to contractual employees appointed prior to the enforcement of said rules.
(B) Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022 - Criteria for eligibility - The benefits of the Rules of 2022 shall be extended to contractual employees if: (i) the employee was appointed to a post created by the Administrative Department with the concurrence of the Finance Department, and (ii) the appointment was conducted through a public advertisement, without distinction as to whether such advertisement was issued by the government or by a placement agency.
Facts of the case:
Multiple contractual employees, appointed before the enforcement of the Rules of 2022, challenged the denial of benefits provided under these rules. Some appellants filed their appeals after the prescribed limitation period and sought condonation of delay. The primary dispute centered on whether their mode of appointment satisfied the requirements for the extension of benefits under Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that the issue had already been resolved by a coordinate bench of the same court. It further noted that the highest court had dismissed a special leave petition filed against the said coordinate bench's order, thereby affirming the legal position.
Issues: Whether contractual employees appointed prior to the enforcement of the Rules of 2022 are entitled to the benefits of those rules if their appointment was made through a public advertisement for a post created with the concurrence of the Finance Department.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the benefits of the Rules of 2022 must be extended to contractual employees appointed prior to the rules' enforcement, provided their appointment conforms to Rule 3, meaning the post was created with administrative and finance department concurrence and the appointment followed a public advertisement, regardless of whether the government or a placement agency issued said advertisement.
Result: Special appeals disposed of in terms of the directions issued by the coordinate bench.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
administrative law
-
government employees
-
regularization of contractual employees
- rule 3 of the rules of 2022
- appointment with finance department concurrence
- public advertisement requirement
-
regularization of contractual employees
-
government employees
-
practice and procedure
-
limitation
-
condonation of delay
- section 5 of the limitation act, 1963
-
condonation of delay
-
appeals
- special appeals
- disposal in terms of earlier order
-
limitation
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 984/2022
CNR: RJHC020622162022 | URN: SAW / 1729U / 2022
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7114/2019
1. Divya Upadhyay D/o Shri Brijesh Kumar Upadhyay, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Murti Mohalla, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
2. Satya Narayan Nagar S/o Shri Ram Pratap Nagar Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Jain Colony, Baran Dist. Baran, Rajasthan.
3. Ajay Verma S/o Shri Ashok Verma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 35, Churu, Dist. Churu, Rajasthan.
4. Mohan Lal S/o Shri Kashi Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Ward No. 22, Naya Bas, Near Sujangarh, Churu, Rajasthan.
5. Surendra Singh S/o Shri Prahalad Singh Tanwar, Aged About 44 Years, R/o New Khunja, Ward No. 4, Behind Pulkit School, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
6. Om Prakash Kaswan S/o Shri Shisupal Kaswan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 21, Gandhi Colony, Churu, Rajasthan.
7. Ajay Shekhawat S/o Shri Sajjan Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ward No. 23, Behind Babosa Murti, Bisau Road, Churu, Rajasthan.
8. Lalit Kumar Lodha S/o Shri Shankar Lal Lodha, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ramesh Sharma, Bhado Ka Vass, Pangarh Road, Shiv Mandir Road, Barmer, Rajasthan.
----Appellants-Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director, Local Self Government Department, Government Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur-16, Rajasthan.
3. Nagar Parishad Dholpur, Through Its Commissioner, Dholpur, Rajasthan.
4. Nagar Parishad Sawai Madhopur, Through Its Commissioner, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
5. Nagar Parishad Barmer, Through Its Commissioner, Barmer, Rajasthan.
6. Nagar Parishad Baran, Through Its Commissioner, Baran, Rajasthan.
7. Nagar Parishad Churu, Through Its Commissioner, Churu, Rajasthan.
8. Nagar Parishad Bhilwara, Through Its Commissioner, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
9. Nagar Parishad Hanumangarh, Through Its Commissioner, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
10. Nagar Parishad Sriganganagar, Through Its Commissioner, Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.
11. Nagar Parishad Sujangarh, Dist. Churu Through Its Commissioner, Sujangarh, Dist. Churu Rajasthan.
12. Nagar Parishad Jaisalmer, Through Its Commissioner, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
13. Nagar Parishad Pali, Through Its Commissioner, Pali, Rajasthan.
14. Director, T And M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd., T And M House, Kohinoor Complex, A Wing, Next To Maharaja Hotel, Dahisar, Mumbai.
Respondents
15. Yash Malhotra S/o Shri Sunil Malhotra, Aged About 27 Years, R/o A-128, Gaytri Nagar-A, Maharani Farm, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
16. Chaitany Sharma S/o Shri Bhagwan Lal Sharma, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Old Nakoda Colony, Baran, Rajasthan.
17. Ankit Mathur S/o Shri Banwari Lal Mathur, Aged About 30 Years, Gota Colony, Fateh Sagar Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan.
18. Devendra Singh Ranawat S/o Shri Madan Singh Ranawat, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Naya Rawla, Sanderao, Teh. Sumerpur, Dist. Pali, Rajasthan.
19. Rajeev Purohit S/o Shri Subhash Purohit, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Behind Old Post Office, Pratap Bazar, Dist. Pali, Rajasthan.
20. Parikshit Jain D/o Shri Paras Kumar Jain, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 1-H-15, Old Housing Board, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
21. Surendra Singh S/o Shri Aidan Singh Charan, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Near Silampuria, Sardar Sahar, Churu, Rajasthan.
22. Vijay Rai Mathur S/o Shri Mukesh Rai, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 17/e/820, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Proforma-Respondents-Petitioners
Connected With
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 963/2022
CNR: RJHC020612212022 | URN: SAW / 1694U / 2022
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6232/2019
1. Aditya Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Jitendra Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Brahampuri, Panchayat Samiti Road, Dausa, Rajasthan.
2. Deepak Kumar Gupta Son Of Shri Chouthmal Gupta, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Behind Choudhary Petrol Pump, Tonk Road, Sanganer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Appellants/Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pr
