Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Surendra Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 July, 2026
Author: Inderjeet Singh
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR/JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1408/2023
Poonam Soni @ Poonam Upadhyay D/o Shri Dhanpal, Aged
About 35 Years, Resident Of 43, Satyam Nagar, Banswara,
District Banswara, School Lecturer In Home Science.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer
Through Its Chairman.
4. Sarvesh Pandey S/o Shri Sant Kumar Pandey, Resident Of
Sneh Kunj, Opposite Modern Public School, Ward No. 01,
Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
5. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary
Department Of Personnel, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
Connected With
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 167/2023
1. Harihar Rajpurohit S/o Shri Om Prakash Purohit, Aged
About 34 Years, Resident Of Near Jail Well, Hanuman Gali,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
2. Anjali Sharma D/o Shri Shanker Lal Sharma, Aged About
33 Years, R/o B-301, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
3. Bharti Meena D/o Shri Raghuvir Meena, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Saya Photo Studio, Khanpur, Dist. Jhalawar,
Rajasthan.
4. Chanakya Wagdiya S/o Shri Jagdish Wagdiya, Aged About
29 Years, R/o Daduka, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara,
Rajasthan.
5. Devendra Kumar S/o Shri Ramnath Singh, Aged About 42
Years, R/o V.P.O. Pachlangi, Tehsil Udaipurwati, Dist.
Jhujhunu, Rajasthan.
6. Divya Kumari D/o Shri Ram Naresh Singh, Aged About 39
Years, R/o 63A, Pratap Nagar Chauraha, Muralipura,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
7. Gurjinder Singh Brar S/o Shri Labh Singh Brar, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o V.p.o. Mohanpura, Sri Ganganagar,
Rajasthan.
8. Kavita Sharma D/o Shri Dev Dutt Sharma, Aged About 38
Years, R/o 467 Kailashpuri, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (2 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
9. Kuldeep Gupta S/o Shri Ram Gopal Gupta, Aged About 44
Years, R/o H.no. 54, Panchawati Colony, Behind Medical
Center, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
10. Kusum Suthar D/o Shri Shanker Lal Suthar, Aged About
38 Years, R/o 54, Shreeji Nagar, Sheoganj, Sirohi,
Rajasthan.
11. Madhu Khatri D/o Shri Ram Lal Khatri, Aged About 46
Years, R/o Khatrion Ka Nichla Vas, Barmer, Rajasthan.
12. Manish Kumar Pachauri S/o Shri Damodar Dayal Pachauri,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o Sher Pada, Bari, Tehsil Bari,
Dist. Dholpur, Rajasthan.
13. Meenu Rathore D/o Shri Roop Singh Rathore, Aged About
36 Years, R/o 130, Ghanshyam Vihar A, Vaishali Marg
West, Panchawala, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
14. Prahlad Singh S/o Shri Mohar Singh, Aged About 36
Years, R/o V.p.o. Kanau, Tehsil Bhadra, District
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
15. Rakesh Kumar Jangir S/o Shri Amilal Jangir, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Ward No. 03, V.p.o. Bhatiwar, Dist-
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
16. Ravindra Singh Rathore S/o Shri Narpat Singh Rathore,
Aged About 42 Years, R/o 274 Kailashpuri, Lalgarh,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
17. Ritu D/o Shri Rajveer Singh Parmar, Aged About 49 Years,
R/o Anand Nagar, Sepau Road, Dholpur, Rajasthan.
18. Sameer Sharma S/o Shri Sajjan Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o V.p.o. Derwala, Via-Nua, Tehsil-
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
19. Santosh Jangir S/o Shri Sita Ram Jangir, Aged About 40
Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Near Trimurti Mandir, Manaksar
Road, Suratgarh, Dist. Shri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
20. Santosh D/o Shri Ghinsa Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Shahid Bhagat Singh Colony, Tilaknagar, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
21. Sanwar Mal Jangid S/o Shri Ram Singh, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Jatto Ka Mohalla, Post Surajgarh, Tehsil
Surajgarh, Dist- Jhunjhunu, Rajadthan.
22. Satya Narayan Sharma S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Sharma,
Aged About 44 Years, R/o V.p.o. Mundra, Tehsil
Sujangarh, Dist Churu, Rajasthan.
23. Savita Dhikwal D/o Shri Bishan Dayal Dhikwal, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o C-150, Kanta Khaturiya Colony,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
24. Shashank Patidar S/o Shri Kamalashanker, Aged About 32
Years, R/o V.p.o. Jogpur,thesil Galiyakot, Dist. Dungerpur,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (3 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Rajasthan.
25. Shilpa Meena D/o Hemraj Meena, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Vikas Nagar, Bundi, Rajasthan.
26. Tanesh Kumar S/o Shri Sukhdev Prasad, Aged About 38
Years, R/o V.p.o. Mojawas, Via-Mandawa, Dist.-
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
27. Urmila D/o Shri Hariram Verma, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Ward No. 29, Jamat, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhanu,
Rajasthan.
28. Udai Bhanu Singh S/o Shri Rameshwar Prajapati, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Plot No.-122, Anand Nagar Colony,
Saipau Road, Dholpur, Rajasthan
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission (Rpsc), Ajmer
Through Its Chairman.
4. Akin Middha S/o Shri Krishan Lal Middha, R/o Ward No.
43, White House Road, Near Kaushik Chikitsalaya,
Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
5. Gayatri D/o Shri Krishan Lal Sharma, R/o Kheteshwar
Basti, Near Modi Kuwan, Gangashahar, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma,
Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School, Shri Dungargarh, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
7. Sunita Suthar D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o Ward No. 05,
Vpo-Ramgarh, Tehsil Nohar, Dist Hanumangarh,
Rajasthan.
8. Saroj Pencia D/o Shri Kernel Singh, R/o Ward No. 33,
Gurudwara Road, Suratgarh, Dist. Sri Ganganagar,
Rajasthan.
9. Sahab Ram S/o Shri Om Prakash, Govt. Sr. Sec. School,
Shyoratada, Bhadara, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
10. Isha Gupta D/o Shri Tarsem Lal, R/o Ward No. 11,
Khrniya Road, Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh,
Rajasthan.
11. Sarvesh Pandey S/o Shri Sant Kumar Pandey, R/o Sneh
Kunj, Opposite Modern Public School, Ward No. 01,
Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 246/2023
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (4 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
1. Pawan Kumar S/o Shri Amar Singh, Aged About 36 Years,
Resident Of Ward No. 6, Behind Stadium Ground, Near
Government College, Suratgarh, Sri Ganganagar
(Rajasthan).
2. Abhishek Anand S/o Shri Baldev Joshi, Aged About 32
Years, B/c Brahmin, R/o Ward No. 04, Pareek Mohalla,
Village Sahva, Tehsil Taranagar, Churu, Rajasthan
3. Deepak Sarswat S/o Shri Awadh Kumar Sarswat, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o Karni Colony, Nagaur, Rajasthan
4. Dr. Anuj Nuwal D/o Shri Satya Narayan Nuwal, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o C-20, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara,
Rajasthan.
5. Jaya Poonia D/o Shri Mahaveer Singh, Aged About 30
Years, B/c Jat, R/o Siddharth Nagar, Near Jawahar Circle,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
6. Manish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Babu Lal Sharma, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o 1-B-4, Housing Board, Kota,
Rajasthan.
7. Minakshi Sharma D/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad Sharma,
Aged About 33 Years, R/o Chak 55 Np, Nanuwala, Tehsil
Raisinghnagar, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan
8. Monika D/o Shri Dalveer Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Vpo Gagarwas, Block Rajgarh, District Churu, Rajasthan.
9. Mukesh Kumar S/o Shri Bhagmal Sharma, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Ward No.3, Near Old State Bank, Tehsil
Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
10. Mukesh Sundesha S/o Shri Babulal Sundesha, Aged About
38 Years, R/o Ambelvav Bera, Tekarawas Bhinmal, District
Jalore, Rajasthan.
11. Neha Maheshwari D/o Shri Ramgopal Maheshwari, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o 412/1, Ram Laxman Colony, Ward
No.7, Near Railway Station, Nawa City, Nagaur,
Rajasthan.
12. Rajendra Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Babu Lal Sharma, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o 1-B-4, Housing Board, Kunhari, Kota,
Rajasthan.
13. Rohit Arora S/o Shri Praveen Kumar Arora, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Adarsh Colony, Suratgarh, District Sri
Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
14. Samir Bhatt S/o Shri Dinesh Chandra Bhatt, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Vpo-Khadagada, Tehsil-Sagwara,dist.-
Dungarpur Rajasthan.
15. Dr. Shalini Agarwal D/o Shri Rajendra Prasad Goyal, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o C-363, Azad Nagar, Bhilwara,
Rajasthan.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (5 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer
Through Its Chairman.
4. Akin Middha S/o Shri Krishan Lal Middha, R/o Ward No.
43, White House Road, Near Kaushik Chikitsalaya,
Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
5. Gayatri D/o Shri Krishan Lal Sharma, R/o Kheteshwar
Basti, Near Modi Kuwan, Gangashahar, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma,
R/o Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School, Shri Dungargarh, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
7. Sunita Suthar D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o Ward No. 05,
Vpo-Ramgarh, Tehsil Nohar, Dist Hanumangarh,
Rajasthan.
8. Saroj Pencia D/o Shri Kernel Singh, R/o Ward No. 33,
Gurudwara Road, Suratgarh, Dist. Sri Ganganagar,
Rajasthan.
9. Sahab Ram S/o Shri Om Prakash, R/o Govt. Sr. Sec.
School, Shyoratada, Bhadara, District Hanumangarh,
Rajasthan.
10. Isha Gupta D/o Shri Tarsem Lal, R/o Ward No. 11,
Khrniya Road, Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh,
Rajasthan.
11. Sarvesh Pandey S/o Shri Sant Kumar Pandey, R/o Sneh
Kunj, Opposite Modern Public School, Ward No. 01,
Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 461/2023
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director, Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Ajay Kumar Rohila S/o Shri Devkinandan, Aged About 42
Years, Resident Of Ward No. 10, Athuna Bass,
Sardarshahar, District Churu At Present Working At Gsss
Phogan Churu (Raj.).
2. Anand Patel S/o Bhura Ram Choudhary, Aged About 40
Years, R/o V/p Thobau, Tehsil Bhinmal, District Jalore At
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (6 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Poonasa, Jalore
(Raj.).
3. Anuj Kumar S/o Ram Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
2/135, New Housing Board, Suratgarh, District
Sriganganagar At Present Working At Suratgarh District
Sriganganagar (Raj.)
4. Arun Kumar Swami S/o Omprakash Swami, Aged About
45 Years, R/o Village And Post Badet, Via Tamkor, Tehsil
Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Mggs,
Ghardana, Khurd, Buhana, Jhunjhunu (Raj.).
5. Arun Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Brahma Singh
Choudhary, Aged About 46 Years, R/o D-24, Majisaka
Bas, Government Press At Present Working At Directorate
Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.).
6. Arvind Kumar Dhilan S/o Prakash Chand Dhilan, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Dhaniguman Singh, Tehsil
Neemkathana, District Sikar At Present Working At Cbeo
Officer Neemkathana, District Sikar (Raj.)
7. Ashok Kumar S/o Shrawan Kumar, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Ward No. 03, Science Park Road, Nawalgarh, Dist.
Jhunjhunu. At Present Gsss Jakhar
8. Ashok Kumar S/o Hema Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Village Asalsar, Post Dhankoli, Tehsil Didwana, District
Nagaur At Present Working At Gsss Ladariya, Nagaur.
9. Bachchu Singh S/o Teja Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Opposite Numaish Ground Heeradas Colony, Bharatpur At
Present Working At Gsss Ibrahimpur, Tehsil Rupwas,
Bharatpur.
10. Balveer S/o Sultan Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Sriganganagar At Present Working At Gsss, Betwasia,
District Jodhpur (Raj.).
11. Bheem Singh S/o Ramjivan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Village And Post Bhatpura, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur
At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Sahadoli,
Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.).
12. Bhupesh Rinwa S/o Prithvi Raj Rinwa, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Ward No. 19, Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh
At Present Working At Gsss, Bhangarh, District
Hanumangarh (Raj.).
13. Bulaki Khan S/o Nathu Khan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Mdv Colony Road, Vivekbalniketan School Kesamne,
Bikaner At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School
Jhajhu, Kolayat, Bikaner (Raj.).
14. Chandra Prakash S/o Narpat Singh, Aged About 42 Years,
R/o Village Sankarana, District Jalore At Present Working
At Gsss, Ahore, District Jalore (Raj.).
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (7 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
15. Chauhal Singh S/o Ajeet Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Village Jaicholi, Post Par, Tehsil Uchain, District Bharatpur
At Present Working At Gsss, Pipla, District Bharatpur
(Raj.).
16. Dayanand Giree S/o Mukh Ram Giree, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Vpo Bhojasar, Chhota, Tehsil Sardarshahar,
District Churu At Present Gsss Pulasar.
17. Deep Chand S/o Sharvan Kumar, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Vpo Niradhanu, Tehsil Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu At
Present Working At Gsss, Shobhasar.
18. Dinesh Kumar Jangir S/o Ram Niwasjangir, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Vpo Dabla, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar
At Present Working At Mahatma Gandhi Govt. School
Chhaja Ki Nangalsikar.
19. Dinesh Kumar Dhaker S/o Narayan Laldhaker, Aged About
44 Years, R/o Village Jaisinghpura, Tehsil Barisadri,
District Chittorgarh At Present Working At Svgms
Barisadrichittaurgarh (Raj.).
20. Dinesh Kumar Joshi S/o Bhawani Shankar Ji, Aged About
45 Years, R/o Bapunagar, Senthi, Chittorgarh, At Present
Working At Gsss Narela.
21. Goverdhan S/o Satyanarayan, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Pugal Road Banglanagar, At Present Working At Gsss
Narela.
22. Himanshu Dadhich S/o Raghunathdadhich, Aged About 45
Years, R/o Inside Vishwakarma Gate, Near Ram Mandir,
Bikaner At Present Working At Ggsss M.d. Marg, Bikaner.
23. Himanshu Jani S/o Yogesh Chandra, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Brahmpuribarisadri At Present Working At
Swami Vivekanandgoverment Model School, Bhadesar.
24. Hukam Chand Koli S/o Devi Lalkoli, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o 33, Koliwara, Surajpole, Teh- Girwa, Udaipur At
Present Working At Emrs Rishabhdev Udaipur.
25. Jagdish Kumar S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Village- Dantiwas, Teh- Bhinmal, District- Jalore At
Present Working At G.s.s.s. Kodka, Jalore.
26. Jitendra Singh S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Vpo- Niradhanu, Th- Malsisar, Dist- Jhunjhunu. Gsss
Chandwa, Jhunjhunu.
27. Kailash Charan S/o Ramkishancharan, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Bhadur Sing Colony, Sardarshahar, Dist. Churu
At Present Working At Gsss Bhanipura.
28. Kamal Kuamr Ojha S/o Vijay Shankar, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Goshala Bass, Sardarshahar At Present
Working At G.s.s.s. School, Sardarshahar. Dist. Churu.
29. Kavita Atal S/o Seeta Ram Jatav, Aged About 34 Years,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (8 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
R/o E-93, Ambedkar Nagar, Alwar At Present Working At
G.s.s.s. School, Akbarpur, Alwar.
30. Kewa Ram S/o Chhagana Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Vp Narta Tehsil Bhinmal, District Jalore At Present
Working At Adpc Smsa, Jalore (Raj.).
31. Krishna Kumar Meena S/o Guman Ram Meena, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Village Neengor, Post Dwarikpura,
Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur At Present Working At Gsss,
Bhainslanapaota, Jaipur (Raj.).
32. Kulveer Singh S/o Balvinder Singh, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Ward No. 12, Rawlamandi, Sriganganagar At Present
Working At Gsss Naharanwali.
33. Laxmi Bai Sharma D/o Gopallal Sharma, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Newai, Dist. Tonk. At Present Working At Gsss
Sirohi.
34. Lichhaman Ram S/o Roopa Ram, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Vpo Hudas, Tehsil Ladnu, District Nagaur At Present
Working At Gsss, Dholiyaladnu, District Nagaur.
35. Lokesh Kumar Meena S/o Ram Singh Meena, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Vpo Ronsi, Tehsil Nadoti, District Karauli At
Present Working At Emrs Ranoli, Block Todabhim, District
Karauli.
36. Mahipal Singh Ashiya S/o Om Prakash, Aged About 32
Years, R/o E-103, Rameshwar Nagar Jodhpur At Present
Working At Gsss Luni, Jodhpur.
37. Mangilal Godara S/o Premaramgodara, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Nathusar Bass, Bikaner At Present Working At
Govt. Sadul Sr. Sec. School, Bikaner.
38. Manish Swami S/o Kamal Swami, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Near Choudhary Well Wad No. 39 At Present Working
At Gasss Sardarshahar.
39. Manit Kumar Meena S/o Hawa Singh Meena, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Hamzapur, Dugherabehror, Alwar At Present
Working At Gsss, Rasgan.
40. Manjeet Kumar S/o Nar Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Vpo Hatpaluramdhan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu, At
Present Working At Gsss Bhojan.
41. Manoj Kumar Sharma S/o Mohan Lal Sharma, Aged About
45 Years, R/o Shahpura, District Bhilwara, At Present
Working At Gangrarchittorgarh.
42. Manisha Yadav S/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 36
Years, R/o 607 Moh. Allaahiran Near
Gopinathmandirpragpura, Paota Jaipur At Present
Working At Sardar Govt. Sr. Sec. School Kotputli, Jaipur.
43. Monalisa D/o Nagendra Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
B-284, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh, Bikaner At Present Gsss
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (9 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Gajner, Bikaner.
44. Monika Chanwariya D/o Late Shri Kailashchanwariya,
Aged About 32 Years, R/o Haxuri Gate Paharganj, Near
Devijis Temple Ward No. 10, Alwar At Present Working At
Gsss Akbarpur.
45. Monika Kumari D/o Raj Kimar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer At Present Gsss Srinagar, Ajmer.
46. Moti Ram S/o Magha Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Daukiyon Ki Dhani, Bijrad, Teh. Chohtan District Barmer
At Present Gsss, Sarnoopanjibarmer.
47. Mukesh Kumar S/o Hoshiyar Singh, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Village Cheemaka Bas, Post Berla, Tehsil Surajgarh,
Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School
Shyampura, Mainana, Jhunjhunu.
48. Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Hanuman Prasad, Aged About
30 Years, R/o Bansuralwar At Present Working At Gsss
Guntashahpura, Alwar.
49. Narendra Chahar S/o Khemchandchahar, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Vop Abusar, District Jhunjhunu At Present
Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Ladusar, Jhunjhunu.
50. Naveen Kumar S/o Raj Kishore, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
D19, Karni Nagar Lalgarh, Bikaner At Present Working At
Gsss, Udairamsar, Bikaner.
51. Naresh Kumar S/o Mangal Chand, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Vpo Chanana, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu At
Present Working At Mggs Chanana, District Jhunjhunu.
52. Neelkanth Choudhary S/o Hari Ram Choudhary, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o B-20, Hanuman Bagh, Nagaur At
Present Working At Gsss Firod, Nagaur.
53. Neelkant Sharma S/o Ram Niwas Sharma, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Vpo Bhainsali, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu At
Present Working At Shaheedrajkumar Gsss
Bhainsalichuru.
54. Nitesh Kumar S/o Uresh Kumar, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
House No. 23/573, Chaupasani Housing Board, Jodhpur
At Present Working At Gsss, Baori, Jodhpur.
55. Nitesh Kumar S/o Ranjeet Singh, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Ward No. 05, Sooraj Colony Angasar Road, Jhunjhunu
At Present Working At Diet Jhunjhunu.
56. Nutan Kumar S/o Umed Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
Vpo Jatbehror, Alwar At Present Working At Ggsss, Sanoli,
Alwar.
57. Om Prakash Godara S/o Shera Ram Godara, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Vpo Mingsaria, Tehsil Sridungargarh,
Bikaner At Present Upani.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (10 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
58. Onkar Jangir S/o Ramdassjangir, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Sangaria, District Hanumangarh At Present Working
At Gsss Malarampura, Sangariya, District Hanumangarh.
59. Parshotam Lal S/o Parmeshwarlal, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Nakarasarchuru, At Present Working At Gsss
Ranasarjaitasar.
60. Pooja Vaishnav D/o Mithulalvaishnav, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Chittorgarh At Present Working At Hass
Gangrar.
61. Prashant Kumar Khandelwal S/o Chander Kant Gupta,
Aged About 30 Years, R/o 48, Moti Nagar Vistar, Alwar At
Present Working At Gsss Karnikot Block Mundawar,
District Alwar.
62. Pratibha Saraf D/o Karan Singh Saraf, Aged About 41
Years, R/o C-19, Dr. R.k. Colony, Bhilwara At Present
Working At Rooplalsomani Govt. Sr. Secondary School
Bhagawanpura, Bhilwara.
63. Prem Singh Rathore S/o Gajraj Singh Rathore, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o House No. 112 At Present Working At
Gsss Banashridungargarh, Bikaner.
64. Priyanka Gupta, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Barodameo,
District Alwar At Present Working At Ggsss, Barodameo,
Alwar.
65. Puneet Kumar Budania S/o Rajendra Singh, Aged About
33 Years, R/o Vpo Ghoriwarakalan, Via Mukundtarah,
Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Gsss Bhojnagar.
66. Raghuveer Singh Nehra S/o Dana Ram Nehra, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Biramsar, Ratangarh, Churu At
Present Working At Gsss Biramsar, Ratangarh, District
Churu.
67. Raish Mohammed S/o Ayub Mohammed, Aged About 40
Years, R/o Pratap Colony, Deoli, Tehsil Deoli, District Tonk
At Present Working At Gsss, Ghatiyali, Ajmer.
68. Rajesh Jatav S/o Lala Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Outside Delhi Gate, Near Laldas Temple, Alwar At Present
Working At Gsss, Bagar Rajput, Alwar.
69. Rajulal Yadav S/o Laxmanyadav, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Village Bichpuri, Post Bamor, Tehsil And District Tonk
At Present Working At Gsss Kohinatmam, Tonk.
70. Rakesh Kumar S/o Purabhu Ram, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Vpo Patanmewan, Tehsil Kishangarh Bas, District
Alwar At Present Working At Gsss, Kishangarh Bas, Alwar.
71. Rakesh Kumar S/o Ram Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Village Lalgarhiya, P.o. Birmana, Tehsil Suratgarh, District
Sriganganagar At Present Working At Girls Sss, Makkasar,
Hanumangarh.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (11 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
72. Ramji Lal Ranga S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Village Khuddi, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu, At
Present Working At Gsss Ghanau.
73. Raj Kumar S/o Het Ram Silla, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
3-A-12 Sector 3 Mster Colony, Lunkaransar, Bikaner At
Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Shekhsar Block
Lunoaransar, District Bikaner.
74. Rajshekhar S/o Dana Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Nehru Colony Sanchore, Dist. Jalore. At Present Working
At Cbeo Office Jalore.
75. Rajveer Singh S/o Sumer Singh Rajpoot, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Village Kailash, Post Nethawa, Taranagar,
District Churu At Present Working At Gsss Jhothara,
Churu.
76. Ram Niwas Bagria S/o Om Prakash Bagria, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Ward No. 22 Khajuwala, District Bikaner At
Present Working At Gsss Khajuwala, District Bikaner.
77. Ranjeet Kumar S/o Pyarelalmeena, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Vpo Bhojasar, Tehsil Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu At
Present Working At Gsss Redibhurawas, Block Taranagar
District Churu.
78. Rati Ram S/o Haridassadh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Behind Sarasdharmkanta, Kaloo Road Ward No. 06
Kunkaransar, Bikaner At Present Working At Smp Govt.
Gort Sr. Sec. Secool Bikaner.
79. Ravinder Singh Shekhawat S/o Gajendra Singh
Shekhawat, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Street No. 10
Ambedkar Colony, Bikaner At Present Working At
Directorate Secondary Education Bikaner.
80. Renu Choudhary D/o Rajkaranchoudhary, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Ward No. 7, At Present Working At Govt. Girls
Sr. Sec. School Sardarshahar.
81. Rohit Kumar Swami S/o Madanlal Swami, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Near Ramdev Temple Vpo Taranagarchuru At
Present Working At Gsss Nuhandrajgarh, Churu.
82. Sandeep Kumar S/o Bahadur Singh Poonia, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Vpo Noohand Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu
At Present Working At Gsss Chandgothichuru.
83. Sanjay Garg S/o Hanuman Prasad, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Chak 4 Arm, Kharwali, Chhattargarh, District Bikaner
At Present Working At Gsss Chhattargarh.
84. Sandeep Kumar S/o Bhadar Singh, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Vpo Nawan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu At Present
Working At Gsss Nawan, Churu.
85. Sandeep Kumar S/o Om Prakash Shastri, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Behind Woolen Mill, Ward No. 24, Gandhinagar,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (12 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Churu At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School
Mehari.
86. Sanwar Mal Sharma S/o Suraj Mal Sharma, Aged About
43 Years, R/o 22, Brahman (Boharamohalla)
Ramjipurakhurd, Tehsil Kishangarh, Renwal, District
Jaipur At Present Gsss Ramjipurakalan.
87. Sharwan Singh S/o Gham Singh, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Bikaner At Present Working At Gsss Pugal,
88. Shrawan Kumar Sahu S/o Manfoolsahu, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Village Raipura, Po Ratusar, Tehsil
Sardarshahar, District Churu, At Present Working At Gsss
Khejradikhnada, Churu.
89. Sikandar Khan S/o Sardar Khan, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Vpocholookhan District Nagaur At Present Working At
Gsss Daulatpura A Block Didwana.
90. Suman D/o Ranver Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Behind Maajaallppa Devi College, Ward No. 16 Satyun
Road, Taranagar, Churu At Present Working At Govt. Sr.
Sec. School Changoi, Taranagar, District Churu.
91. Sumitra Railya S/o Dula Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Vpo Jhareli, Village Rampur, A-B Tehsil Jayal, District
Nagaur At Present Working At Bls Govt. Sr. Sec. School
Nimbijodha Block Ladnu, District Nagaur.
92. Surendra Khatri S/o Radheyshyam Sharma, Aged About
44 Years, R/o Village And Post Doomroli, Tehsil Neemrana
At Present Working At Gsss Kanhawas, Block Neemrana,
Alwar.
93. Surendra Kumar Kadhayala S/o Jugalkishorkadhayala,
Aged About 46 Years, R/o Churichatarpura, Jhunjhunu At
Present Working At Gsss Churi, Ajitgarh, Jhunjhunu.
94. Suresh Kumar S/o Ghewar Ram Choudhary, Aged About
44 Years, R/o B-25, Abhaygarh Scheme Near K.v No. 1
(Af) Jodhpur At Present Working At Gsss Bhatinda,
Jodhpur.
95. Sushila S/o Subhash Chandra, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Village Hansas, Post Jhanjha, Tehsil Buhana, District
Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Shaheedamarsingh
Ggsss Sanwlod, Buhana, Jhunjhunu.
96. Subhash Chand S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Ward No. 20 Near, Morning Bells, Public School
Ambedkar Park Srivijaynagar, District Sriganganagar At
Present Working At Gsss 10 Ksd Mokhamwal A Block
Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar.
97. Vijay Karan S/o Bheru Dan Dharan, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o Aguna Bass, Mathaniya, Jodhpur At Present Working
At Gsss, Newara Road, Osian Jodhpur.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (13 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
98. Vijay Kumar Swarnkar S/o Rajendra Prasad Swarnkar,
Aged About 36 Years, R/o Behind Agrasen Girls College
Agrasenvihar, Hindaun City Karauli At Present Working At
Gsss Fazilabadkarauli.
99. Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Mahaveer Prasad, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Village Ghumanda Tehsil Ratangarh, Churu
At Present Working At Govt. Senior Secondary School
Menasar, Ratangarh, Churu.
100. Madan Lal S/o Prabhu Lal, Resident Of Village And Post
Hadveda, Tehsil Shiv, District Barmer
101. Vishnu Singh S/o Shri Kailash Dan Charan, Resident Of
Village And Post Tehla Via Paukalla, Tehsil Ria Badi District
Nagaur.
102. Surendra Sharma S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, Resident
Of H. No. 124, Ward No. 4, Behind Dr. Giri, Band Gali,
Purani Abadi, Sriganganagar.
103. Mukesh Kumar Choudhary, Resident Of Village And Post
Bibolao Ganeti, Todaraisingh, District Tonk.
104. Sanju Choudhary, Resident Of Village Firans Ka Bans, Post
Chuneri, District Jhunjhunu.
105. Priyanka Solanki, Resident Of A-110, Anykampa
Residency, Shastri Nagar, Durgapura, Jaipur.
106. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Amara Ram, Resident Of Village
Jodi Ka Bas, Post Nawa Via Beri Choti, Tehsil Deedwana
District Nagaur.
107. Sarita D/o Shri Gugan Ram, Resident Of Village And Post
Office Sardarpura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu.
108. Manoj Kumar Singhal S/o Shri Om Prakash Singhal,
Resident Of H. No. 3-A-27, Mahaveer Nagar Iii, Kota.
109. Sunaina Sharma D/o Shri Sagarmal Sharma, Resident Of
Infront Of Poddar College, Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu.
110. Jagdish Sharma S/o Shri Kashi Ram, Resident Of Village
And Post Kupali, Tehsil Srivijaynagar, District
Sriganganagar.
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 907/2023
1. Surendra S/o Shri Pokar Ram, Aged About 36 Years,
Vilalge Naharo Ki Dhani, Post Jhanwar, District Jodhpur
(Rajasthan).
2. Mahipal Vaishnawa S/o Shri Mani Ram, Aged About 42
Years, 44, Vaishnav Sadan, Maderna Colony, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (14 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer
Through Its Chairman.
4. Shri Bhajan Lal Vishnoi, Government Senior Secondary
School, Manaklao, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, (School Lecturer
In Political Science).
5. Shri Pukh Raj, Government Senior Secondary School,
Buchkala, Pipad, Jodhpur (School Lecturer In Hindi).
6. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Department Of Personnel, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1332/2023
1. Surendra Kumar S/o Sh. Amar Singh, Aged About 41
Years, Resident Of 721/43, R.k. Puram, Bhajanganj, Dist.
Ajmer.
2. Aadu Ram Choudhary S/o Sh. Bhera Ram Choudhary,
Aged About 32 Years, R/o Jatipura, Osian District Jodhpur.
3. Pyare Lal S/o Sh. Ram Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Salwa Khurd, Post Pipad Road, Tehsil Pipad City, District
Jodhpur.
4. Yogesh Kumar Joshi S/o Sh. Bhawani Shankar, Aged
About 45 Years, R/o Joona Bazar, Village And Post
Tinwari, District Jodhpur.
5. Suresh Prajapat S/o Sh. Kishna Ram, Aged About 34
Years, R/o 116, Shikshak Nagar, Mata Ka Than, Punjla,
District Jodhpur.
6. Ved Prakash Meena S/o Sh. Ram Charan Meena, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Village Lalpur, Post Hadiya, Tehsil
Mahwa, District Dausa.
7. Arvind Kumar Samariya S/o Sh. Kailash Chand Samariya,
Aged About 40 Years, R/o Shakuntlam, Ward No. 40
Nearby Falsa Wala Balaji Hanuman Nagar, District Dausa.
8. Namonarayan Meena S/o Sh. Phaili Ram Meena, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Paparda, Tehsil
Nangal Rajawthan, District Dausa.
9. Ajay Pal S/o Sh. Ratan Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Vpo Budibawal, Tehsil Kot Kasim, District Alwar.
10. Lokesh Mudgal S/o Sh. Banwari Lal Sharma, Aged About
38 Years, R/o Near Aradhana School Sanjay Nagar,
District Bharatpur.
11. Sharwan Kumar Pareek S/o Sh. Laxmi Narayan Pareek,
Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gali No. 02 Gandhi Nagar,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (15 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
District Barmer.
12. Poonama Ram S/o Sh. Naga Ram, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Sajan Ki Dhani, Post Sanpa Manji, Tehsil Sindhary,
District Barmer.
13. Meka Ram S/o Sh. Dheema Ram, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o 01, Babalon Ki Dhaniyon, Village Kanawas Ka Pana,
Post Jaleli Fozdara, District Jodhpur.
14. Sushil Kumar S/o Suraj Bhan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Village Moi Sadda, Post Moi Purani, Via Singhana, District
Jhunjhunu.
15. Sher Singh S/o Sh. Bhagwana Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Village - Post Moi Purani, Via Singhana, Tehsil
Buhana, District Jhunjhunu.
16. Sohan Ram Jawliya S/o Sh. Jodha Ram, Aged About 42
Years, R/o V And P Karani/jhanwar, Jodhpur.
17. Mahesh Kumar S/o Sh. Puran Singh, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Vpo Dharsoni, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur.
18. Subhash Chandra S/o Sh. Baldev Singh, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Vpo Dadiya, Via Katarathal, District Sikar.
19. Moola Ram S/o Sh. Ramu Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Village Santoda Khurd, Post Malunga, Tehsil Tinwari,
District Jodhpur.
20. Arif Mohammed Mansoori S/o Sh. Ismail Mohammed,
Aged About 47 Years, R/o 411 Bsnl Office Ke Pass, Sector
4, Keshavpura, Dadabari, District Kota.
21. Vikas Arya S/o Sh. Subhash Chandra, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Village Daulatpura, Post Chudela, District
Jhunjhunu.
22. Kumbharam Samota S/o Sh. Baldev Singh Samta, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Trilokpura, Post Sihodi, Tehsil
Shreemadhopur, District Sikar.
23. Mishra Ram Suthar S/o Sh. Maga Ram Suthar, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o Village Post Sarno Ka Tala, Tehsil
Sindhari, District Barmer.
24. Sawai Singh S/o Sh. Rawat Singh, Aged About 36 Years,
R/o Vandp Bilasar, Tehsil Sindhari, District Barmer.
25. Saket Kumar S/o Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Aged About 32
Years, R/o 65 Teeku Ram Ka Bass, Village Jaisinghpura,
Post Hetamsar, District Jhunjhunu.
26. Narendra Bishnoi S/o Sh. Shivnarayan Bishnoi, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Plot No. 102, Sanjay Colony, District
Nagaur.
27. Bharat Lal Yadav S/o Sh. Hanuman Yadav, Aged About 38
Years, R/o P.no. B-4 Keshav Nagar, Mantown, District
Sawai Madhopur.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (16 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
28. Ram Niwas S/o Sh. Ram Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Vpo Sidhmukh, Tehsil Sidmukh, District Churu.
29. Lokesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Babu Lal Meena, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Vill. Antarheda, Post Patoli, Tehsil
Mahwa, District Dausa.
30. Nitin Patnakar S/o Sh. Manik Rao Patankar, Aged About
46 Years, R/o H.no. 24, Gali No. 10 Saraswati Colony,
Baran Road, District Kota.
31. Kumari Chanda D/o Sh. Khema Ram Jat, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Rajendra Singh Bijrania Ward No. 16 Govt.
Hospital Ke Samne Palsana, District Sikar.
32. Kuldeep Kumar S/o Sh. Bhoop Singh, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Vpo Hansiyawas, Tehsil Rajgarh, District
Churu.
33. Praveen Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Mange Ram Yadav, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o Vpo Katopur, Tehsil Kotkasim, District
Alwar.
34. Dharmendra Singh S/o Sh. Rajendra Singh, Aged About
36 Years, R/o Village Post Ghatri, Tehsil Bhusawar, District
Bharatpur.
35. Mohan Lal Godara S/o Sh. Toga Ram Godara, Aged About
43 Years, R/o Govt. Sr. Sec. School Bhimda, District
Barmer.
36. Lokesh Kumar S/o Sh. Dayanand, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o V.p. Tain, Via Bissau, District Jhunjhunu.
37. Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 42
Years, R/o V.p. Tain, Via Bissau, District Jhunjhunu.
38. Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Sishu Pal Singh, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Bala Ka Bas, Post Birmi, District Jhunjhunu.
39. Sandeep Kumar Choudhary S/o Sh. Jagdish Prasad, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Village Tigiyas, Post, Mandrella,
Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary To The
Government, Department Of School Education,
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer, Through Its
Secretary.
4. Akin Middha S/o Sh. Krishan Lal Middha, At Present
Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary
School (B) Suratgarh, District Sri-Ganganagar (Raj.).
5. Gayatri D/o Sh. Krishan Lal Sharma, At Present Posted As
Lecturer At Prin. Karni Senior Secondary School,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (17 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Deshnok, District Bikaner (Raj.)
6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Sh. Chiranji Lal Sharma, At
Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Girls Senior
Secondary School, Dungargarh, District Bikaner (Raj.)
7. Isha Gupta D/o Sh. Tarsem Lal, At Present Posted As
Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School (G),
Suratgarh, District Sri-Ganganagar (Raj.).
8. Sunita Suthar D/o Sh. Jagdish Prasad, At Present Posted
As Lecturer At Government Higher Secondary School
Dabdi, District Hanumangarh (Raj.).
9. Pukhraj S/o Sh. Munna Ram, At Present Posted As
Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School
Buchkalan, Pipar City, District Jodhpur (Raj.)
10. Nirmala Adha D/o Sh. Hadmandan, At Present Posted As
Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School,
Rampura Bhatia, Tinwari, District Jodhpur (Raj.).
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2012/2023
1. Kuldeep Choudhary S/o Shri Bane Singh Choudhary, Aged
About 34 Years, Village Dungarsingh Pura, Post Mundria
Bara, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
2. Shiv Kumar S/o Shri Dalle Singh Kaswan, Aged About 35
Years, Village Jigasari Bari, Post Mundria Bara, Tehsil
Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer
Through Its Chairman.
4. Shri Sahab Ram S/o Shri Om Prakash, School Lecturer In
Political Science, Government Senior Secondary School
Sheoratada, Bhadra, R/o Dungarsinghpura, Tehsil Bhadra,
District Hanumangarh 335502
5. Shri Surendra Singh S/o Shri Atma Ram, School Lecturer
In Hindi, Government Senior Secondary School
Sheoratada, Bhadra, R/o Village Nethrana, Tehsil Bhadra,
District Hanumangarh (Raj.).
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7146/2023
1. Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Sardara Ram, Aged About 46
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (18 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Years, Resident Of Kalori, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu.
2. Gudiya Choudhary D/o Shri Godha Ram, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Near Railway Station, Khadibagh, Garedo Ki
Dhani, Ward No. 7, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur
3. Arvind Galav S/o Shri Omprakash Galav, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Rinjha, Post Salpura, Tehsil Chhabra, District
Baran
4. Sanjay Kumar S/o Shri Ramniwas, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Tehadki (Blaki Dhani), Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar
5. Hitesh Kumar Suthar S/o Shri Dhulji Suthar, Aged About
33 Years, R/o Village Post Jogiwara, Tehsil Sabla, District
Dungarpur
6. Kapil Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Omprakash Gupta, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Plot No. 235, Shanti Kunj, District
Alwar
7. Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Jaynarayan, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Bhuda Ka Bas (Sheetal), Post Butiyana, Tehsil
Laxmangarh, District Alwar
8. Jagtar Singh S/o Shri Kirpal Singh, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o House No. 6, Street No. 1, Braham Colony, Naer
Basanti Check, District Sri Ganganagar
9. Dheera Ram S/o Shri Parkha Ram, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Village Jalampura, Post Jeevana, Tehsil Sayala,
District Jalore
10. Chandra Shekhar Jain S/o Shri Roopchand Jain, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Prakarsh Medical Sotre, Near P.n.b.,
Baroda Mev, District Alwar
11. Inder Singh S/o Shri Pratap Singh Kalja, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Chelanabas, Post Lakhlan, Tehsil Rajgarh,
District Churu
12. Hukam Chand Saini S/o Shri Dalchand Saini, Aged About
44 Years, R/o Sedh Mohalla, Tehsil Ramgarh, District
Alwar
13. Ramesh Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Jhuntha Ram Gora,
Aged About 38 Years, R/o Behind A.n. Public School,
Kacholiya Road, Radhaswami Bagh, Tehsil Chomu, District
Jaipur
14. Hariom S/o Shri Ramji Dass, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
House No. 3/234, Ward No. 5, Housing Board Colony,
District Hanumangarh
15. Ramawatar Kumawat S/o Shri Babulal, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Near Bus Stand, Ward No. 5, Chokadi Vias
Guhala, District Sikar
16. Indraj Godara S/o Shri Omprakash, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Village - 4 S.k.m., Post - 1 S.k.m., Tehsil Gharsana,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (19 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
District Sri Ganganagar
17. Ramswarup Saini S/o Shri Chauthu Ram Saini, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o Deeppura, Tehsil Udaipurwati,
District Jhunjhunu
18. Kishan Sompura S/o Shri Bharat Kumar Sompura, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Salathwara, Tehsil Sagwara, District
Dungarpur
19. Rakesh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Arjun Lal Yadav, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Bhagtawari Ki Dhani, Nolakha Kothi,
Village And Post Hadota, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur
20. Monika D/o Shri Bajrang Lal, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Shyopura, Post Ojtou, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu
21. Harish Chandra S/o Shri Maniram, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Chunawad, District Sri Ganganagar
22. Uttam Singh S/o Shri Chatra Pal Singh, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Panlava Via Beedasar, District Sikar
23. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Vidhyadhar Saini, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Sotwara, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu
24. Shalini Marwaha D/o Shri Khanchand Arora, Aged About
47 Years, R/o 53/120, Veer Tejaji Road, Mansarovar,
District Jaipur
25. Bala Ram S/o Shri Sada Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Jeganiya Bidawatan Via Rajaldesar, Tehsil Ratangarh,
District Churu
26. Rizvana Bagum D/o Mohammad Husain, Aged About 34
Years, R/o House No. 7-C-21, Vigyan Nagar Extension,
District Kota
27. Hemant Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Sohan Lal Kumawat,
Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 11, Village Nangal,
Post Bay, Tehsil Dataramgarh, District Sikar
28. Suresh Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Ram Narayan Kumawat,
Aged About 40 Years, R/o Arlai, Post Kheraruddha, Tehsil
Ramganjmandi, District Kota
29. Rajeev Meena S/o Shri Ramsahay Meena, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Manch, Post Ata, District Karauli
30. Narayan Ram S/o Shri Mohan Lal, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Ward No. 9, Nahrawali, Tehsil Anoopgarh, District Sri
Ganganagar
31. Rajveer Singh Jat S/o Shri Rameshwar Jat, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Vajirpur, Tehsil Vajirpur, District Sawai
Madhopur
32. Sarvesh S/o Shri Lakhmi Chand, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Chiruni, Post Pipali, Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar
33. Yunis Ali S/o Shri Rustam Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Bilaspur, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (20 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
34. Mohammed Iqbal S/o Shri Mohammed Usman, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o Near Haidari Masjid, Gopeshwar
Basti, Gangashahar, District Bikaner
35. Lalit Patidar S/o Shri Mahesh Patidar, Aged About 38
Years, R/o Gamadi, Post Aamja, Tehsil Gadhi, District
Banswara
36. Nirmala Saini D/o Shri Girdhari Lal Saini, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Anjani Hanuman Mandir, Ringas Road, Hadota,
Chomu, District Jaipur
37. Ramesh Serawat S/o Shri Mangi Lal Serawat, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Veer Sagar Ki Dhani, Village Post Itawa,
Bhopaji, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur
38. Preeti Yadav D/o Shri Rohitashwa Singh Yadav, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Jakhrana, Tehsil Behrod, District
Alwar
39. Savitri Sharma D/o Shri Sukh Lal Sharma, Aged About 35
Years, R/o C/o Geeta Sharma 27 Ramavihar 100 Feet
Road Meeranagar, Sobhagpura Udaipur
40. Omprakash S/o Shri Radha Krishan, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Near P.h.e.d., Ward No. 20, Sadulshahar, District Sri
Ganganagar
41. Mohan Ram S/o Shri Jawara Ram, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Khardapura, Post Rajliya, Tehsil Nava, District Nagaur
42. Rakesh Kumawat S/o Shri Radheyshyam Kumawat, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Near Panchwati, Govindgarh, District
Jaipur
43. Pooja Poonia D/o Shri Abhish Poonia, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Phooleji, Tehsil Loonkaransar, District Bikaner
44. Geeta Meena D/o Shri Ramswaroop, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Kachawa, Post Todanagar, Tehsil Laxmangarh,
District Alwar
45. Vinod Garu S/o Shri Roshan Lal Garu, Aged About 43
Years, R/o P.w.d. Road, Mukherjee Chowk, Kankroli,
District Rajsamand
46. Arun Kumar S/o Shri Chhotu Ram Meena, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Village- Narhait, Post- Pratapgarh,tehsil-
Thanagazi, District Alwar
47. Kuldeep Meena S/o Shri Sitaram Meena, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Ranodiya, Tehsil Pipalda, District Kota
48. Dolat Singh S/o Shri Mohan Singh, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o Village Post Peshua, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi
49. Deepakshi Saxena D/o Shri Anil Saxena, Aged About 34
Years, R/o B-357, Janta Colony, District Jaipur
50. Rakesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Birbal Ram Meena, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Dholasari, Tehsil Dataramgarh,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (21 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
District Sikar
51. Gargi Sharma D/o Shri Dilip Sharma, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Ward No. 40, Veer Hanuman Mandir, Near
Mahesh Cinema, Khemi Sati Road, District Jhunjhunu
52. Pravesh Jain S/o Shri Lokendra Jain, Aged About 38
Years, R/o 66/28, Heerapath, Mansarovar, District Jaipur
53. Ramniwas Yadav S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 38
Years, R/o Kuned, Tehsil Kotputali, District Jaipur
54. Shyama Khandelwal D/o Shri Satya Narayan Gupta, Aged
About 43 Years, R/o 122/211, Vijaypath, Agrawal Farm,
Mansarovar, District Jaipur
55. Babeeta Kumari D/o Shri Babu Ram Singh, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Vp Mohanpura Bhamarwasi, Tehsil Chirawa,
District Jhunjhunu
56. Sunil Kumar Parihar S/o Shri Man Singh Parihar, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o 689, Hanuman Nagar, Kota Road,
Deoli, Tehsil- Jahazpur, District- Bhilwara
57. Kavita D/o Shri Gyan Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Bijali Colony, Ward No. 41, District Hanumangarh.
58. Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Paltu Ram, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o Scheme No.2, Lajpat Nagar Near Easy Day Alwar.
59. Omprakash Morya S/o Shri Prabhu Ram Morya, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Regaron Ka Mohalla, Bidiyad, Tehsil
Parbatsar, District Nagaur.
60. Chetna Choudhary D/o Shri Narendra Singh Choudhary,
Aged About 37 Years, R/o House Number 75/80, Veer
Tajaji Nagar, Daurai, Beawar Road, District Ajmer.
61. Dinesh Kumar S/o Shri Babu Lal, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Indira Colony Vistar, Tehsil And District Pali.
62. Sunita Kumari D/o Shri Harphool Singh, Aged About 34
Years, R/o V.p.o.- Beri, Tehsil And District Sikar.
63. Usha Saugat D/o Shri Shriram Saugat, Aged About 43
Years, R/o V.p.o. Bhandodi, Tehsil And District Alwar.
64. Suresh Kumar Soni S/o Shri Lallu Ram Soni, Aged About
35 Years, R/o V.p.o. Buteri, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar.
65. Neelu Agarwal D/o Shri Bhagwati Lal Agarwal, Aged About
30 Years, R/o 2, New Trimurti Complex, Hiran Magri,
Sector-4 , District Udaipur.
66. Samina Bano D/o Shri Shahid Hussain., Aged About 35
Years, R/o House Number 1B, Gali Number 9, Saraswati
Colony Police Line Road , District Kota.
67. Sanjay Kumar Muniya S/o Shri Mansingh Muniya, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Village Kakanwani, Post Ramgarh,
Tehsil Kushalgarh, District Banswara.
68. Rajendra Kumar Meena S/o Shri Banwari Lal Meena, Aged
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (22 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
About 36 Years, R/o V.p.o. Kant, Tehsil Shahpura, District
Jaipur.
69. Gyarsi Lal Saini S/o Shri Birdu Ram Saini, Aged About 45
Years, R/o R/o 43, Modi Bag Ward No. 31 Chhawani,
Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar .
70. Sanjay Rawat S/o Shri Rajendra Rawat, Aged About 33
Years, R/o V.p.o. Chhoti Badrel, District Banswara.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To
The Government, Department Of Secondary Education,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
2. Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan,
Bikaner
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Rajasthan, Ajmer
Through Its Secretary
4. Akin Middha S/o Shri Krishan Lal Middha, At Present
Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary
School, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar.
5. Gayatri D/o Shri Krishan Lal Sharma, At Present Posted
As Lecturer At Prin. Karni Senior Secondary School,
Deshnok, District Bikaner.
6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma,
At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Girls Senior
Secondary School, Dungargarh, District Bikaner.
7. Isha Gupta D/o Shri Tarsem Lal, At Present Posted As
Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School,
Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar.
8. Sunita Suthar D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, At Present Posted
As Lecturer At Government Higher Secondary School
Dabdi, District
9. Pukhraj S/o Shri Munna Ram, At Present Posted As
Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School
Buchkalan, Pipar City, District Jodhpur.
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11975/2024
1. Sunil Choudhary S/o Kishna Ram Choudhary, Aged About
39 Years, Resident Of 41, Veer Teja Colony, Outside
Mahamandir 3Rd Pole, Jodhpur.
2. Vikas Tiwari S/o Sriniwas Tiwari, Aged About 34 Years,
Resident Of Near Vishnoi Dharamshala, Sanjay Colony,
Nagaur.
----Petitioners
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (23 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,
Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
----Respondents
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 119/2025
1. Madan Mohan Sharma S/o Badri Lal Sharma, Aged About
53 Years, R/o 217-A, Amrit Nagar, Iskon Road,
Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Manchanda Soni S/o Naresh Kumar Soni, Aged About 50
Years, 33, New Colony, Under Khatipura Overbridge,
Khatipura Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Mukh Ram Yadav S/o Nigal Singh Yadav, Aged About 58
Years, Vpo Kanwarpura, Tehsil Kotputli, Dist. Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
4. Kamal Kishor Sharma S/o Laxmi Narayan Sharma, Aged
About 46 Years, Ward No. 01, Bus Stand Nathawala,
Tehsil Shahpura, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Meghraj Sharma S/o Ramkumar Sharma, Aged About 36
Years, Village Raheda Post Kalyanpura Khurd, Tehsil
Kotputli, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
6. Sunil Kumar Jangir S/o Shri Nand Kishor Jangir, Aged
About 32 Years, 57, Abhinandan Vihar, Bajri Mandi Road,
Panchyawala Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
7. Amba Lal Gurjar S/o Gopee Lal Gurjar, Aged About 55
Years, 767-D, Krish Nagar, Tol-Tax, Tonk Road, Sanganer,
Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
8. Prerna Bhardwaj W/o Shailendra Bhatt, Aged About 51
Years, S-57, Mahaveer Nagar, Durgapura, Tonk Road,
Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
9. Akhter Bano W/o Abdul Haque, Aged About 50 Years,
Home No. 4354, Topkahne Ka Rasta, Chandpol Bazar,
Near Ek Meenar Masjid, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
10. Surendar Singh Rathor S/o Tej Singh Rathor, Aged About
38 Years, Village Mothuka, Post Dalpatpura, Tehsil Neem
Ka Thana, Dist. Sikar, Rajasthan.
11. Amrit Lal S/o Gordhan Prasad Joshi, Aged About 44 Years,
Near Rayat, Building Bagar Chowk, Nagori Get Ke Andar,
Dist. Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
12. Rameshwar S/o Om Prakash Suthar, Aged About 46
Years, Behind Govt, Hospital Near Vishnoi Bagechi, Pipar
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (24 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
City, Dist. Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
13. Deepti Chatur Jain D/o Shri Suman Chatur, Aged About
47 Years, 11/12, Eklingnath Colony, Sector-4, Hiran
Magri, Near Bsnl, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
14. Anand Kumar Jain S/o Sohan Lal Jain, Aged About 50
Years, 6 A, Gayatri Nagar, Behind Sofiya School, South
Sunderwas, Block Girwa, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
15. Devendra Gameti S/o Kuku Ram Gameti, Aged About 37
Years, H. No. 532/6, Ward No. 26, Awari Mata Colony,
Gayariawas Road, Tehsil Girva, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
16. Bhupendra Purbia S/o Premchand Ji Purbia, Aged About
56 Years, C-224, Ambamata Scheme, Dist. Udaipur,
Rajasthan.
17. Keerti Kumar Gandhi S/o Gebi Lal Gandhi, Aged About 50
Years, Bapu Bazar, Near Police Thana, Po Rishabhdeo
Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
18. Umesh Salwi S/o Babu Lal Salwi, Aged About 43 Years,
153 Loveli State, Roopsagar Road, Behind Of Shubh-Labh
Apartment, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
19. Jagdish Chandra Jat S/o Gulab Chand Jat, Aged About 48
Years, Vpo Rundera, Tehsil Vallabhnagar, Dist. Udaipur,
Rajasthan.
20. Jagdish Chandra Choubisa S/o Ghanshyam Lal Choubisa,
Aged About 55 Years, Ragunath Temple Inside Surajpole
Bhinder, Tehsil Bhinder, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan.
21. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Ramji Lal Meena, Aged About
37 Years, Village Nayawas Post Nangal Rajawthan, Tehsil
Raruwas, Dausa, Rajasthan.
22. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Devchand Meena, Aged About 38
Years, Vpo Aund Meena, Tehsil Mahwa, Dist. Dausa,
Rajasthan.
23. Sushil Kumar Sharma S/o Rameshwar Prasad Sharma,
Aged About 46 Years, Karni Nagar, Dist. Dausa,
Rajasthan.
24. Man Mohan Sharma S/o Kailash Chandra Sharma, Aged
About 44 Years, Vpo Kalwan, Tehsil Sikrai Dist. Dausa,
Rajasthan.
25. Rajbai Gupta D/o Purushottam Gupta, Aged About 43
Years, Ashok Nagar,-I,dist. Dausa, Rajasthan.
26. Mithalal Gurja S/o Girraj Prasad Gurjar, Aged About 47
Years, Village Dhigariya Tappa Koleswer, Tehsil Bandikui,
Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan.
27. Shivam Gurjar S/o Sahab Singh Gurjar, Aged About 42
Years, Vpo Paota, Tehsil Mahwa, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan.
28. Ramawatar Bairwa S/o Shravan Kumar Bairwa, Aged
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (25 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
About 43 Years, Village-Nangal Jhamar Wara, Post, Biwai,
Tehsil Baijupaoa, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan.
29. Mohan Upadhyay S/o Prahlad Sharma, Aged About 51
Years, D-9, Upadhyay Sadan, Panchayat Samiti Ke Piche,
New Colony, Lalsot, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan.
30. Maya Meena D/o Kishan Lal Meena, Aged About 41 Years,
Teeba Wali Dhani, Khori, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of School Education, Government Of
Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan,
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. Joint Secretary, Education Department (Group-2),
Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Ashutosh Das Agarwal (Employer Id Rjjp198918016316),
Through The Office Of Director, Secondary Education,
Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
5. Vinod Kumar (Employer Id Rjpo198736011787), Through
The Office Of Director, Secondary Education, Government
Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
6. Narendra Kumar Sharma (Employer Id
Rjsm199732003104), Through The Office Of Director,
Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
7. Pradeep Singh Meena (Employer Id Rjbw199708009058),
Through The Office Of Director, Secondary Education,
Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
connected with
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6281/2022
URN: CW / 12270U / 2022
1. Sunil Mishra S/o Kunj Bihari Mishra, Aged About 41
Years, R/o 42, Malviya Nagar, Near Gaurav Tower, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Mohit Sankrit S/o Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Aged About
36 Years, R/o Village Bhojawas, Tehsil Kotputli, District
Jaipur, (Raj.).
3. Dara Singh S/o Ramesh Chand, Aged About 37 Years,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (26 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
R/o Village Sihali Khurel, Post Sihali Kalan, Tehsil
Mundawar, District Alwar - 301401.
4. Ravi Prakash Kathotia S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Ward No. 29, Post Sardarpura Bass, Tehsil
Nohar, District Hanumangarh.
5. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Shivram Meena, Aged About 33
Years, R/o GSSS, raisar, Jamwa Ramgarh, District Jaipur.
6. Shivani Pareek S/o Dinesh Pareek, Aged About 36 Years,
R/o Anand Chowk, Mamta Circle, Devli, District Tonk
(Raj.)
7. Ambuj Kumar S/o Nathulal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
32 B Block, Near Central School No.1, Pratap Nagar,
Udaipur (Raj.)
8. Girraj Prasad Meena S/o Pyare Lal Meena, Aged About
38 Years, R/o Manema, Post Katkar, Tehsil Hindaun City,
District Karauli, Rajasthan.
9. Bhawani Singh S/o Shambhu Singh, Aged About 38
Years, R/o 182, Shastri Nagar, Tehsil Hudda, District
Bhilwara - 311021.
10. Ameen Khan S/o Kallu Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
1242/51, Jailar Wali Gali, Near Kabristan, Ajmer (Raj.)
11. Vinit Kumar S/o Gangaram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Village Sherpur, Post Katopur, Tehsil Kotkasim, District
Alwar - 301702.
12. Prem Shankar Meena S/o Jeevan Lal Meena, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Village Surarikala, Post Barauli, Tehsil
Sarmthura, District Dholpur - 3280311.
13. Manoj Meena S/o Brij Mohan Meena, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Village Khilahipur Meena, Post Nagal Pahari,
Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli - 322238.
14. Prithvi Raj S/o Lal Chand, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Ward No. 4, Near Ramdev Temple, Post Gajsinghpur,
District Srigananagar - 335024.
15. Kuldeep Singh S/o Narayan Singh, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Ward No. 29, Kalyanpura, Marg No. 4, Khatriyo Ka
Bass, District Barmer - 344001.
16. Dr. Bhoor Singh Meena S/o Lohadchya Ram, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Village Milaksray, Post Sop, Tehsil Nadouti,
District Karauli - 322204.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (27 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
17. Shilpa W/o Paras Kumar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Jat
Basti, Islampur, Jhunjhunu (Raj.).
18. Hemant Kumar Arvind S/o Jagdish Prasad Arvind, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Kota Road, Retipara, Sangod,
District Kota, Rajasthan.
19. Nandan Kamal Prakash Saini S/o Om Prakash Saini,
Aged About 39 Years, R/o E-399, Murlipura Scheme,
Jaipur - 302039.
20. Amarjeet Singh S/o Garjant Singh, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Anupgarh, Preeti Palace, Ward No.22,
Ganganagar (Raj.).
21. Moh. Rashid S/o Moh Salim, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Vpo Shekhsar Ward No. 10, Tehsil Jhunjhunu, District
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan - 333001.
22. Virendara Sahewal S/o Gyanchand Sahewal, Aged About
30 Years, R/o Ward No.11, Nohar, Hanumangarh (Raj.)
23. Chandan Chawla S/o Naresh Chander Chawla, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o F-16, Satyam Nagar, Gangangar
(Raj.)
24. Kuldeepak Mewara S/o Balram Mewara, Aged About 29
Years, R/o Mali Mohalla, Dug, Jhalawar (Raj.)
25. Narendra Singh S/o Deep Chand Sharma, Aged About
28 Years, R/o Village Kachwana, District Bhadra, District
Hanumangarh - 335504.
26. Sandeep Mittal S/o Nand Lal Mittal, Aged About 39
Years, R/o 70-N Block, Ward No. 61, Shriganganagar
(Raj.) - 335001.
27. Manish Kumar S/o Yadram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
391, Mahaveer Colony, Bhadana, Kota (Raj.).
28. Sanjana Khetawat D/o Jitendra Khetawat, Aged About
28 Years, R/o Diggi Bajar, Ajmer (Raj.).
29. Ravinder Kumar S/o Surender Kumar Modi, Aged About
39 Years, R/o 7/251 Rhb Colony, Hanumangarh (Raj.).
30. Balram Meena S/o Jaipal Meena, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Balaji Ke Niche, Baso Kala, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.).
31. Brijesh Malakar S/o Om Prakash Malakar, Aged About 38
Years, R/o Near City Post Office, Kishangarh, Ajmer
(Raj.).
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (28 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
32. Vipin Kumar Sharma S/o Manoj Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Ward No.20, Shyam Mandir, Nohar,
Hanumangarh (Raj.).
33. Vimal Kumar Badiwal S/o Sitaram, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Vimalpura, Post Kanarpura, Tehsil Chomu, District
Jaipur (Raj.) - 303801.
34. Abhishek Chaudhary S/o Jai Singh, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Village Raboori, Post Rawatsar Kunjla, Tehsil
Rajgarh, District Churu (Raj.) - 331303.
35. Surender Singh S/o Harbans Singh, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Ward No.11, Old Abadi, Sriganganagar (Raj.).
36. Priyanka Rana D/o Ramesh Kumar, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Village Samula, Kangara, Himachal Pradesh
Presently Posted At Gsss 3Nd, Anupgarh, Ganganagar
(Raj.).
37. Pawan Kumar S/o Govind Ram, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Bassai, Mahendergarh, Haryana
38. Mishri Lal Sharma S/o Babu Lal Sharma, Aged About 41
Years, R/o Nagla Ahiwasi, Aligarh (Up).
39. Samsher Ali S/o Liyakat Ali, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Village Tal, Post Rasoolpur, Tehsil Khetri, District
Jhunjhunu - 333020.
40. Rohitash Kumar S/o Jagdish Prasad Meena, Aged About
30 Years, R/o Village Kanch Ki Bass, Post Jaluki, Tehsil
Nagaur, District Bharatpur(Raj.).
41. Mukesh S/o Malaram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village
Mundital, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu - 331023.
42. Sagar Singh Meena S/o Daya Ram Meena, Aged About
33 Years, R/o Surajpura Mal, Post Jhanjhani, Tehsil
Chhipabarod, District Baran, Rajasthan.
43. Prasanna Paul S/o Anil Prakash Paul, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Aadarsh Colony, 45, Post Bansur, District
Alwar - 301402.
44. Sandeep Kumar S/o Krishan Kumar, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Gsss, Bhirani, Bhadra, Hanumangarh (Raj.).
45. Durgesh Dauneria S/o Pramod Kumar Dauneria, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Teachers Colony, 78, Ward No. 31,
Tehsil Agra, District Agra, Uttar Pradesh.
46. Ankita Chauhan W/o Lovenish Saini, Aged About 39
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (29 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Years, R/o 47- C Block, Vishnu Vihar, Mahesh Nagar,
Jaipur (Raj.).
47. Hariram Meena S/o Mangtu Ram, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Babaji Ka Neigla, Ward No. 10, Post Bhandaur,
District Bharatpur (Raj.) - 321026.
48. Tek Chand S/o Mahender Kumar, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o New Mandi, Gharsana, Ganganagar (Raj.).
49. Lokendra Singh S/o Bhoop Singh, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Village Gadalpur, Post Parmadra, Tehsil Deeg,
District Bharatpur (Raj.) - 321203.
50. Manish Agarwal S/o Mohan Lal Agarwal, Aged About 34
Years, R/o 105, Aadarsh Nagar-A, Sawaimadhopur
(Raj.).
51. Ashvani Kumar Bhardwaj S/o Ramanand Sharma, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Bhandoli, Guthali, Bulandshahar
(Up).
52. Arun Kumar S/o Yadram Singh, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Samesura, Ibrahimpur, Bharatpur (Raj.).
53. Shyam Garg S/o Mahesh Chand, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Modi Padda, Old City, Dholpur (Raj.).
54. Giriraj Sharma S/o Ramavtar Sharma, Aged About 38
Years, R/o 42A, Arya Nagar, Murlipura, Jaipur (Raj.).
55. Dinesh Chhimpa S/o Vijay Ratan, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Ward No.14, Bikaner (Raj.).
56. Vikram Singh S/o Onkar Mal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Jejusar, Jhunjhunu (Raj.).
57. Deepak Gotherwal S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Sambhar Lake, New Bus Stand, Jaipur (Raj.).
58. Pooja Verma S/o Brahmram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Gali No.3, Nathwali, Ganganagar (Raj.).
59. Chander Shekhar S/o Subhash Nanda, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Ward No.43, Sureshla, Hanumangarh (Raj.).
60. Pooja D/o Dwarka Prasad Sharma, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Ward No.24, Sangaria, Hanumangarh (Raj.).
61. Dinesh Kumar S/o Manak Chand, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Mahaveer Nagar, Extension, Kota (Raj.).
62. Manish Chawra S/o Prem Kumar Chawra, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Plot No. 135, Roop Nagar, Pawta, Distt.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (30 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Jodhpur (Raj.).
63. Vijay Pal S/o Shri Balram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Ward No. 23, Behind The Bishnoi Temple, Rawatsar,
Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).
64. Sudhir Kumar Garuwa S/o Shri Hanuman Garuwa, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Ward No. 21, Sanjay Colony,
Rawatsar, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).
65. Vishnu Kumar Dhakad S/o Mangal Ram Dhakad, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Bamori, Bagaur, Distt. Karoli (Raj.).
66. Chet Ram Meena S/o Shri Shyoraj Meena, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Khaspuriya, Post Khaspuriya, Tehsil
Mangrol, Distt. Bundi (Raj.).
67. Mahendra Jajoria S/o Shri Dolat Ram Kumawat, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Gsss Lorda, Tehsil Gadhi, Distt.
Banswara (Raj.).
68. Deepak Kumar Sharma S/o Rajkumar Sharma, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Sector-11A, 1 Arw, Hanumangarh
Junction, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).
69. Ranu Solanki S/o Khushi Ram Solanki, Aged About 40
Years, R/o Chhipo Ka Mohalla, Naya Shahar, Kishangarh,
Distt. Ajmer (Raj.).
70. Amit Rohila S/o Devendra Rohila, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o 24, Samaspura Road, Dhupia Colony, Distt.
Jhunjhunu (Raj.).
71. Sapana Yadav D/o Satyapal Singh, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Village And Post Shimla, Tehsil Khetri, Distt.
Jhunjhunu (Raj.).
72. Sushil Kumar Tandi S/o Shri Genaram, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Tandiyo Ka Bas, Idwa, Distt. Nagaur (Raj.).
73. Averinder Pal Jeet Singh S/o Gurmel Singh, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Chak 07, Mld, Tehsil
Gharsana, Distt. Sriganganagar (Raj.).
74. Anita Khandelwal D/o Ram Babu Gupta, Aged About 38
Years, R/o B-45 A, Green Park Colony, Behind Rajesh
Toyota Showroon, Agra Road, Jaipur.
75. Dharm Singh Meena S/o Shri Ramfool Meena, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Village Kurigama, Post Leelothi,
Tehsil Sarmthura, Distt. Dholpur (Raj.).
76. Deepak Narayan Vyas S/o Shri Yadunandan Narayan
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (31 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Vyas, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Near
Pushkarna School, Distt. Bikaner (Raj.).
77. Surekha Yadav D/o Shri Sube Singh Yadav, Aged About
33 Years, R/o 240, Mehta Ko Mohalla, Silarpur, Distt.
Alwar (Raj.).
78. Manohar Singh Suthar S/o Shri Hanuman Ram, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Dablisara, Chawa, Distt. Barmer
(Raj.).
79. Karuna Faujdar D/o Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 41
Years, R/o 37, Chowk Nangla, Jeevna, Sogar, Distt.
Bharatpur (Raj.).
80. Jagram Choudhary S/o Shri Bagta Ram Choudhary,
Aged About 42 Years, R/o Sindhari Chootoo, Distt.
Barmer (Raj.).
81. Amar Singh S/o Maniram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Ward No. 1, Harijan Basti Deeplana, Distt.
Hanumangarh (Raj.).
82. Vinay Kumar Soni S/o Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 16, Nai Sadak, Distt.
Churu (Raj.).
83. Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Subhash Chandra, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Sulkhaniya Chhota, Distt. Churu (Raj.).
84. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Balkishan Meena, Aged About
40 Years, R/o Village Koondla, Post Shahpura, Tehsil
Mangrol, Distt. Baran (Raj.).
85. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Hanuman Parsad, Aged About
41 Years, R/o Ward No. 13, Goluwala Niwadan, Tehsil
Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan - 335802.
86. Naval Kishor Meena S/o Shri Rameshwar Dayal Meena,
Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 35, Ward No. 12,
Hanuman Mandir Ke Pass, Keshopura, Distt. Kota (Raj.).
87. Pawan Kumar Meena S/o Shri Rameshwar Meena, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o 49, Thakur Ji Ka Mohalla, Shyopura,
Pipalda, Distt. Kota (Raj.).
88. Sushant Sharma S/o Tilok Chand Sharma, Aged About
40 Years, R/o Ward No. 20, Gaushala Road, Nohar,
Hanumangarh (Raj.).
89. Praveen Kumar Ghintala S/o Lota Ram, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Fefana, 1 Knn, Nohar Hanumangarh (Raj.).
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (32 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
90. Manu S/o Narendra Singh Malik, Aged About 36 Years,
Ward No. 12, Gayatri Nagar, Nadbai, Distt. Bharatpur
(Raj.).
91. Mukesh Kumar Kaushal S/o Shri Badri Lal Kaushal, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 04, Laxmi Market, Chhan,
Distt. Sawaimadhopur (Raj.).
92. Nand Kishor Bijaraniya S/o Shri Narayan Ram, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 20, Laushal Chhoti, Distt.
Sikar (Raj.).
93. Mahesh Suthar S/o Shri Likhmi Chand, Aged About 34
Years, R/o 48, Tayagiji Ki Bagichi, Rathori Kuwa, Distt.
Nagaur (Raj.) - 341001.
94. Brajesh Kumar Bidasar S/o Ratna Ram Bidasar, Aged
About 31 Years, Village And Post Siwa, Tehsil Nagaur,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
95. Rajendra Kumar Aarya S/o Ramswaroop Aarya, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Near Ups School, Nawalpura, Distt.
Bundi (Raj.).
96. Vikas Kumar Soni S/o Shanker Lal Soni, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Shiv Sagar Kunj, Ward No. 22, Distt. Sikar
(Raj.).
97. Vinod Kumar Gupta S/o Ghanshyam Gupta, Aged About
38 Years, Lata Gali, Near Govt. School, Udai Mod,
Gangapur City, Distt. Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
98. Mukesh Kumar Verma S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Verma, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Mohalla Regron Ka, Village Nasirda,
Distt. Tonk (Raj.).
99. Gurvinder Singh S/o Shri Balakaran Singh, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Ward No. 01, 30 Ppp, Distt. Ganganagar
(Raj.).
100. Gurpreet Singh S/o Daleep Singh, Aged About 29 Years,
R/o Ward No. 27, Indira Colony, Distt. Hanumangarh
(Raj.).
101. Sachin Kumar Bansal S/o Shri Ram Kumar Bansal, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o 165, On Nh-62, Thakur Virendra
Nagar, Mandour, Ditt. Jodhpur (Raj.).
102. Naveen Kumar Sharma S/o Sitaram Sharma, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Plot No. 14, Ganesh Nagar-B, Distt.
Sawaimadhopur (Raj.).
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (33 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
103. Uttam Prkash Verma S/o Shri Jugal Kishor, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Ward No. 08, Near Shyam Park,
Shrimadhopur, District Sikar, (Raj.).
104. Naveen Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Shimbhu Dayal
Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Roop Pura, Post
Thao, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar (Raj.).
105. Narendra Kumar Meena S/o Shri Ramkaran Meena, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o Gram Khandila, Post - Khuri, Distt.
Baran (Raj.).
106. Pawan Kumar Saharan S/o Banvari Lal Saharan, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o Bhalau Tiba, Bhalau, Tal, Distt.
Churu (Raj.).
107. Pushpa Soni D/o Rai Chand Soni, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Ward No. 18, Ladnu, Distt. Nagaur (Raj.).
108. Shiv Kumar Tak S/o Dulichand Tak, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Ward No. 70, Gali No. 6, Chokuti Mohalla,
Distt. Bikaner (Raj.).
109. Mittho Lal S/o Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Village And Post Usrami, Tehsil Kumher, Distt. Bharatpur
(Raj.).
110. Amit Nama S/o Omprakash, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Mahaveer Nagar-Iii, Distt. Kota (Raj.).
111. Krishna Kumar Meena S/o Shri Bhuralal Meena, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Goramgarh, Post Kuradiya, Tehsil
Jahajpur, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
112. Niranjan Singh Shekhawat S/o Manohar Singh
Shekhawat, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village And Post
Bagar, Shekhawat Colony District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
113. Pramod Saini S/o Ramswarup Saini, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Bagadiya School Ke Samne, Laxmangarh,
Distt. Sikar (Raj.).
114. Kamal Kishor S/o Tejpal Rathi, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Avadhpuri, Jonsganj, Distt. Ajmer (Raj.)- 305001.
115. Mukesh Kumar Roj S/o Mahadev Prasad Roj, Aged About
33 Years, R/o Govt. Senior Secondary School, Boghwas,
Sambhar Lake, Jaipur.
116. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Rohitash Meena, Aged About
40 Years, R/o Fatehpur, Bansur, District Alwar,
Rajasthan.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (34 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department Of Secondary Education, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Board Of Secondary Education, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
3. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
4. Abhishek Pareek S/o Om Prakash Pareek, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Ward No. 22, Behind Shanker Takies,
Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Presently Posted As
School Lecturer At Government Sr. Secondary School,
Dindoli, Rashmi, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
5. Neeraj Sharma S/o Ramgopal Sharma, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Behind Parshuram Dharmshala Badi, District
Dholpur, Presently Posted As School Lecturer At
Government Senior Secondary School Kanchanpur, Bari,
District Dholpur, Rajasthan.
6. Jooth Singh S/o Mod Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Rajpura, Gudau, Sanchor, District Jalore, Rajasthan,
Presently Posted As School Lecturer At Government
Senior Secondary School, Dungri, Raniwara, District
Jalore, Rajasthan.
7. Sugan Singh Shekhawat S/o Ummed Singh, Aged About
39 Years, R/o Maksudpura, Sujawas, Ranoli, District
Sikar, Presently Posted As School Lecturer At Bolo Ka
Sanwata, Gangrar, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
Connected With
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 895/2023
URN: CW / 1672U / 2023
1. Pradeep Kumar Khanagwal S/o Jugel Kishor Verma,
Aged About 30 Years, R/o Vpo Jawanpura, Via Bhabru
Tehsil Virat Nagar, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Rajesh Kumar Dhakar S/o Ram Kishan Dhakar, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Village Balapura, Baori,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (35 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Todaraisingh, Tonk Rajasthan.
3. Alka Patidar D/o Bhawani Shankar Patidar, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Dhakar Colony, Todaraisingh, Tehsil
Todaraisingh, District Tonk.
4. Amilal Saini S/o Rohitashwa Saini, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Village Chipparai, Post Harsora, Tehsil Bansur
District Alwar, Rajasthan.
5. Anand Baboo Baghel S/o Dharam Singh Baghel, Aged
About 42 Years, R/o Plot No. 3 Behind Residency School,
Sardar Patel Marg C Scheme Jaipur Rajasthan.
6. Anjali Gupta D/o Jugal Kishor Gupta, Aged About 30
Years, R/o 52 Narsingh Vihar Gokulpura, Rajasthan.
7. Archana Joshi D/o Surya Nandan Tiwari, Aged About 39
Years, R/o 20/21, Chitrakut Gokul Dham Society
Bhilwara District Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
8. Ashish Kumar Bayle S/o Dinesh Kumar, Aged About 33
Years, R/o House No. 178, New Shakti Nagar, Aanm Ka
Talab, Naka Madar Ajmer, Rajasthan.
9. Bharti Jangir S/o Subhash Chandra Jangir, Aged About
29 Years, R/o Village Chara Ka Bas, Parasrampura,
Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
10. Bipin Sharma S/o Chhotey Lal Sharma, Aged About 47
Years, R/o 462, Ustan Bhawan, Sita Wadi Karauli,
Karauli, Rajasthan.
11. Deepika Saini D/o Sugan Lal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Dev Bhawan, Behind Ice Factory, Ajmer Road, Kekri,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
12. Deevan Singh S/o Bharat Singh, Aged About 38 Years,
Nagar Road, Near Hanuman Temple, Deeg, Bharatpur,
Rajasthan.
13. Deeya Ram S/o Vishna Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Reigaro Ka Bharala Bass Nanan Road Pipar City, Jodhpur
Rajasthan.
14. Devendra Kumar Meghwanshi S/o Mor Pal Meghwanshi,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o Banthanli, Dooni, Tonk,
Rajasthan.
15. Devesh Kumar Sharma S/o Yogeshwar Kumar Sharma,
Aged About 30 Years, R/o Near Co-Operative Bank
Bissau Road, Ward No 34 Churu , Rajasthan.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (36 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
16. Dilip Kumar Garhwal S/o Suraj Mal Garhwal, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Vpo Jajekalan, Shahpura, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
17. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Mohan Lal Meena, Aged About
40 Years, R/o Dungari Wali Dhani, Nirjharna Lalsot
Dausa, Rajasthan.
18. Gajraj S/o Hanuman Prasad, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Surya Nagar, Ward No. 27 Hanuman Garh Town,
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
19. Ganpat Lal Pannu S/o Teeka Ram Pannu, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Village Lundawas, Po Rupawas, Tehsil Sojat
City, District Pali Rajasthan.
20. Gunjan Bhambu D/o Kashmir Singh, Aged About 31
Years, R/o 71, Sanjay Colony, Rpa Road, Near Panipech,
Jaipur Rajasthan.
21. Hemraj Yadav S/o Mahadev Yadav, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Vpo Hanutia Via Amarsar, Shahpura, Jaipur
Rajasthan.
22. Indu Chitosia D/o Santosh Kumar Chitosia, Aged About
29 Years, R/o 291, Chota Circle, 60 Feet Road, Jyanti
Nagar, 52 Foot Hanuman Mandir, Agra Road, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
23. Jaikaran Singh Godara S/o Surender Singh Godara,
Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Godara Ka Bas,
Singnor, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan.
24. Kalpana Choudhary D/o Sagar Mal Choudhary, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Near Railway Phatak Kishangarh,
Renwal Jaipur, Rajasthan.
25. Kalpana Choudhary D/o Goverdhan Singh Choudhary,
Aged About 42 Years, R/o House No. 61, Anand Complex
Near Power House, Eklingpura, Girwa, Udaipur
Rajasthan.
26. Kamlesh Kumar Khator S/o Radheshyam Khator, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o Main Market Gilund, Relmagra,
Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
27. Kamlesh Kumar Rangera S/o Sardar Mal Rangera, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o Village Shivram Ka Baspost Kotri
Simrala, Shrimadhopur, Sikar Rajasthan.
28. Kanhaiya Lal Merotha S/o Heera Lal Merotha, Aged
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (37 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
About 35 Years, R/o Kherli Kalya, Post Dungarajya,
Digod, Kota Rajasthan.
29. Karan Kumar Jat S/o Udai Lal Jat, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Village Nayagaon Post Sarana, Mandalganj,
Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
30. Lalit Sharma S/o Jawari Lal Sharma, Aged About 40
Years, R/o 38 Balaji Nagar, Rawala Bera, Mata Ka Than
Main Road Puliya, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
31. Lalita Kumari, D/o Veerbhan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Plot No. 54, Road No. 3, Nirman Nagar Post
Shyamnagar, Jaipur, Distt. Jaipur Rajasthan.
32. Lalu Ram Mali, S/o Ghisa Lal Mali, Aged About 36 Years,
R/o (C/o) Nand Lal Gupta, Chandra Colony, Madanganj,
Kishangarh, Rajasthan.
33. Mahendra Kumar Sharma S/o Hanuman Sahai Sharma,
Aged About 37 Years, R/o 171/33 Pratpnagar Jaipur
Rajasthan.
34. Mahendra Patel S/o Sohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o 31/184 Aaimata Nagar Near Gattani Hospital
Khokharia, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
35. Manish Kumar Goyal S/o Shyam Sundar Goyal, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Vaidhya Colony, Gangapur City,
Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
36. Manish Jangir S/o Nand Kishor Jangid, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Vpo Puranabas, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar
Rajasthan.
37. Manisha D/o Durga Das, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Gopal Das Colony, Near Mahawar Bhawan Matour Road,
Khairthal, Kishangarh Bas Alwar Rajasthan.
38. Manisha Ameta D/o Madan Lal Ameta, Aged About 40
Years, R/o 207, Star Residency Sikar Rajasthan.
39. Manju Meena D/o Ramkirpal Meena, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Plot No. 30, Bhoogor By Pass Alwar,
Rajasthan.
40. Manphool Singh Bishoni S/o Gemper Ram Bishnoi, Aged
About 28 Years, R/o Village Shriram Nagar, Post Jamba
Tehsil Bap District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
41. Manraj Singh Gurjar S/o Ram Lal Gurjar, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Village Kanwarpura, Deoli, Tonk Rajasthan.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (38 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
42. Mohan Singh Dhakar S/o Kalla Ram Dhakar, Aged About
41 Years, R/o 65-Arya Nagar, Murlipura Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
43. Monika Sain D/o Rohitash Kumar Sain, Aged About 36
Years, R/o 59, New Friends Colony, Alwar, Rajasthan.
44. Mukesh Kumar Jat S/o Shiv Lal Jat, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Vp Lakhola, Teshil Shahda District Bhilwara,
State Rajasthan.
45. Mukesh Verma S/o Pali Ram Bunkar, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Out Of Churu Gate, Ward No. 34, Ambedkar
Colony, Ramgarh Shekhawati, Sikar, Rajasthan.
46. Namrata Kumawat D/o Brahma Nand, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Ward No. 7, Behind Shastri School, R/o Neem
Ka Thana, Sikar, Rajasthan.
47. Narendra Chipha S/o Rajendra Prasad, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Charan Singh Nawalgarh Road, Sikar,
Rajasthan.
48. Naveen Bhati S/o Nenu Ram Bhati, Aged About 38
Years, R/o 27 Laddha Colony, Loco Road, Ratanda,
Jodhpur.
49. Nayantara Joshi D/o Rajkumar Joshi, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Ward No. 13 Rawali Talab Road, Neem Ka
Thana, Sikar.
50. Om Prakash S/o Bhagirath, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Vpo Bhamasi, Churu, Rajasthan.
51. Om Prakash S/o Munni Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Ward No. 7, Adarah Colony, Anoopgarh, Sriganganagar,
Rajasthan.
52. Pavan Prakash Kumawat S/o Murlidhar Kumawat, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Oswali Mohalla Madanganj,
Kishangarh, Ajmer, Rajasthan.
53. Pawan Kumar Maru S/o Chunni Lal Maru, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Kushalgarh, Banswara, Rajasthan.
54. Pawan Phatak S/o Purushottam Sharma, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Near Psc School Ashok Vihar Colony, Jain
Mandir Road New Mandi, Hindaun City, Distt. Karauli,
Rajasthan.
55. Pooja Kumawat D/o Om Prakash Kumawat, Aged About
30 Years, R/o Pareek Colony Kuchaman City Nagaur
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (39 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Rajasthan.
56. Poonam D/o Vidhadhar Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Ward No. 13, Shastri Nagar, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
57. Poonam Saini D/o Mahesh Kumar, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Behind Kali Tanki, Near Railway Station Ratangarh,
Churu Rajasthan.
58. Poonam Verma D/o Gyan Prakash Verma, Aged About
42 Years, R/o Svn School Ke Paas, Street No.2,
Rampura, Lalgar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
59. Poonam Yadav D/o Sunder Lal, Aged About 29 Years,
R/o Village Aamarsar Post Sirsala, Bhuana, Jhunjhunu,
Rajasthan.
60. Prakash Choudhary S/o Shyoji Ram Jat, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Near Head Post Office, Ward No. 05,
Shrimadhopur, Sikar Rajasthan.
61. Preeti Parmar D/o Pooran Singh Parmar, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Behind Kela Mata Mandir Maharaj Bag Bari
Dholpur, Rajasthan.
62. Priyanka Rajpurohit D/o Sawai Singh Rajpurohit, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o Near Govt. Hospital Shiv Colony,
Village Ras Jaitran District Pali, Rajasthan.
63. Radha Kishan Khoiwal S/o Daya Shankar Khoiwal, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o B-392, Panchmukhi Coloni,
Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
64. Rajesh Kumar Salvi S/o Durga Ram, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Village And Post Diwer, Bhim, Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
65. Rajkumar Saini S/o Lallu Ram Saini, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Pili Ki Talai, Near Water Tank, Kunda, Amber
Jaipur Rajasthan.
66. Rajpal Meel S/o Sultan Singh Meel, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Vpo Badusar, Laxmangarh, Sikar, Rajasthan.
67. Rakesh Kumar Khatik S/o Kistur Mal Khatik, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Kalyanpura, Post Dhikola, Shahpura,
Bhilwara Rajasthan.
68. Rakhi Roy D/o Lalit Roy, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Swami Viveknand Government Model School Dudu,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
69. Raman Muwal S/o Ranjeet Singh, Aged About 35 Years,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (40 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
R/o Vpo Jerthi District Sikar Dhod, Sikar Rajasthan.
70. Ramesh Chand Kumawat S/o Badri Narayan Kumawat,
Aged About 35 Years, R/o Boraj (Bhagaton Ka Mohalla)
Via Phulera, Tehsil Mauzamabad, Jaipur Rajasthan.
71. Ramesh Chandra Sharma S/o Ganpat Lal Sharma, Aged
About 38 Years, R/o Village Surpura Post Bagawas,
Viratnagar, Jaipur Rajasthan.
72. Ravindra Kumar S/o Ram Niwash, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Village Jhanjhot Post Khudot, Chirawa, Jhunjhunu.
73. Reena Choudhary D/o Surendra Kumar Choudhary, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o Dt-07 Block 02 Jk Gram Emdi
Rajsamand Rajasthan.
74. Reshpal Saini S/o Dhansingh Saini, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Vpo Rambas Tehsil Govindgarh, District
Alwar, Rajasthan.
75. Ritika Punwaniya D/o Khemchand Punwaniya, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o House No1 B 476, Kudi Bhagtasni
Housing Board, Luni, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
76. Rohitash Yogi S/o Rajendra Prasad Yogi, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Simarla Jagir, Shrimadhopur, Sikar,
Rajasthan.
77. Saavya Shilla D/o Dariya Singh, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o 10/321, Malviya Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur Rajasthan.
78. Sandeep Kumar S/o Kedar Mal, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Village Parasrampura, Tehsil Nawalgarh District
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
79. Sandeep Kumar Sharma S/o Mishri Lal Sharma, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o 51, Kumharo Ka Vas, Sumerpur
District Pali, Rajasthan.
80. Saroj Meel D/o Ramsukh Meel, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Village Fakirpura, Post Kasli Block Dhod, District
Sikar.
81. Satveer Yadav S/o Mohan Lal Yadav, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Village Mangalwa Post Rampur Tehsil Bansur
District Alwar Rajasthan.
82. Satya Prakash Singhal S/o Vidya Sagar Gupta, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o 86 Balmandir Colony, Sawai
Madhopur Rajasthan.
83. Satyapal Yadav S/o Mukhram Yadav, Aged About 34
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (41 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Years, R/o Mundiakhera Mundawar, Alwar Rajasthan.
84. Savita Gared D/o Dinesh Gared, Aged About 28 Years,
R/o Plot No.1 Balaji Mod Sirsi Road, Jaipur.
85. Savita Meena D/o Prahlad Ram Meena, Aged About 34
Years, R/o 2G3 Mahaveer Nagar Extension, Kota
Ladpura, Kota Rajasthan.
86. Shiv Raj S/o Madan Lal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Village Ransisar Charana Didwana, Nagaur, Rajasthan.
87. Shivansh Dixit S/o J.p. Sharma, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o 2/288 Kala Kian Housing Board Alwar, Rajasthan.
88. Smita Saini D/o Pyare Lal Saini, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o C-320 Malviya Nagar, Sanganer Jaipur Rajasthan.
89. Sonam Meena D/o Ram Kalyan Meena, Aged About 30
Years, R/o 7, Keshav Nagar, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
90. Sonu Kothari S/o Durga Lal Kothari, Aged About 38
Years, R/o Rawla Chowk Sanganer, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
91. Subhash Kumar Saini S/o Kalu Ram Saini, Aged About
35 Years, R/o Veer Hanuman Ji Ka Rasta, Ward No. 43,
Chomu Jaipur Rajasthan.
92. Sudarshan Vaghela S/o Pooran Mal Vaghela, Aged About
30 Years, R/o 40, Surya Colony Naya Gaon Road, Pali
Rajasthan.
93. Sudhir Singh Kaler S/o Pit Ram Kaler, Aged About 38
Years, R/o Village Chouradi Athuni Post Bibasar
Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan.
94. Sulochana D/o Banwari Lal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
369-A, Ekta Path, Vidhyut Nagar, Gate No. 8, Sarathi
Marg, Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
95. Suman Kumari D/o Onkar Mal, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Out Side Of Churu Gate, Near Ramdev Ji Temple,
Ramgarh Shekhawati, Sikar Rajasthan.
96. Sumer Chand Jangir S/o Birbal Ram Jangir, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Vpo Bakara, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan.
97. Sunil Kumar Rabia S/o Mahesh Kumar Rabia, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o Village Nabipura Tehsil Fatehpur
District Sikar Rajasthan.
98. Suresh Kumar S/o Harwanta Ram, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Ward No.1, Sutharon Ka Bas Genhun Road,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (42 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Fatehpur Sikar Rajasthan.
99. Udit Prabha Sharma S/o Mr. Dinesh Chand Sharma,
Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mansarovar Colony Near Bus
Stand Rajgarh Alwar Rajasthan.
100. Vani Dubey D/o Ramakant Dubey, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o C/o Shyam Manohar Near Marugarh, Jodhpur,
Jodhpur Rajasthan.
101. Vasudev Sukhwal S/o Kailash Chandra, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Vpo Baghana Teshil Bhim District Rajsamand
Rajasthan
102. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Ramgopal, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Village And Post Khanpur Meena, Bari Dholpur,
Rajasthan.
103. Vikash S/o Bahadur Mal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Shiv
Singh Pura, Post Pacheri Bari Buhana, Jhunjhunu
Rajasthan.
104. Vinay Kumar Mishra S/o Raj Kishor Mishra, Aged About
38 Years, R/o Bara Kumedan Sahab Bajariya Road,
Dholpur, Rajasthan.
105. Vineeta Singh D/o Shishupal Singh, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Vpo Jejusar, Nawal Garh, Jhunjhunu
Rajasthan.
106. Yashpal Singh S/o Pal Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Radha Devi House No 8 Behind Police Line,meeranagar,
Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
107. Kamlapati Varma S/o Bhupendra Kumar Varma, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o 68, Gandhi Nagar, Section 9 L Ward
No. 38, Hanuman Garh Junction District Hanumangarh
(Rajasthan)
108. Poonam Sharma D/o Shyam Sundar Sharma, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o Kuchaman Tehsil Nawa, District
Nagaur (Rajasthan)
109. Shankar Lal Jat Son Of Shri Ram Dhan Jat, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Taswariya Bansa, Tehsil Phooliya District
Bhilwara (Rajasthan)
110. Yashbala Parihar D/o Ram Kumar Parihar, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Plot No. 49-A, Shanti Colony Airport Ke
Saamne Khokawas, Sanganer, Distt. Jaipur (Raj.)
111. Jalaludin S/o Iqbal Hussain, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (43 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Karpura Mohalla, Ajmeri Gate Ke Pass, Nagaur.
112. Herminder Kaur S/o Gurdev Singh, Aged About 50
Years, R/o 30 Multan Mangal Alwar Rajasthan.
113. Ankit Choudhary S/o Kiran Pal Singh, Aged About 30
Years, R/o House No. 157, Ganpati Nagar, Sooariya
Road, Kota Ladpura, Kota.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief
Secretary, Deaprtment Of Secondary Education. Govt.
Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secreatriat, Jaipur, Rajasthan .
2. The Director, Board Of Secondary Education, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
3. The Joint Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1488/2023
URN: CW / 2808U / 2023
1. Dr. Ram Swaroop Jat S/o Sh. Mangla Ram Jat, R/o Vill
Moondwara Post Sinodiya Via Jobner Dist Jaipur
2. Pawan Kumar Kalal S/o Sh. Moti Lal, R/o B - 271 Malviya
Nagar Jaipur
3. Kailash Chandra Meena S/o Sh. Girraj Prasad Meena,
R/o A - 94 Main Road Ganipur Vill Ganipur Teh Sikrai
Dist Dausa
4. Praveen Kumar Jangid S/o Sh. Mahaveer Prasad Khati,
R/o Vill Saroli Post Juniya Teh Dooni Dist Tonk
5. Ajeet Singh Awana S/o Sh. Hemraj Awana, R/o Vill
Neemali Thes Sainthal Dist Dausa
6. Amit Kumar S/o Sh. Keshari Lal, R/o Vpo Dhamora Teh
Udaipurwati Dist Jhunjhunu
7. Amit Kumar Khorania S/o Sh. Moti Lal Khorania, R/o Vpo
Rojari Teh Phulera Dist Jaipur
8. Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Kishna Ram, R/o Vill Kandhran Post
Thanamathui Teh Rajgarh Dist Churu
9. Anil Kumar Upadhyaya S/o Sh. Shyam Lal Upadhyaya,
R/o B 71 Sunscity Near Arjiya Chorha Bhilwara
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (44 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
10. Anita Kumari Yadav D/o Sh. Ramji Lal Yadav, R/o Vill
Gurgachaka Post Nangal Salia Teh Kotkasim Dist Alwar
11. Arvind Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Sanval Ram Meena, R/o
Vpo Mandawari, Teh. Lalsot Dist Dausa
12. Asha Ram S/o Sh. Shethu Ram, R/o Vpo Chhila Teh
Lohawat Dist Jodhpur
13. Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Mool Chand, R/o Ward 28 Kali
Bhatta Ke Pas Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
14. Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Omprakash, R/o Vpo Hasampur
Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar
15. Ashok Kumar Kuri S/o Sh. Mali Ram Kuri, R/o Vpo
Reengus Teh Reengus Dist Sikar
16. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Mool Chand Meena, R/o
Vpo Jatwara Teh Bassi Dist Jaipur
17. Ashutosh Singh S/o Sh. Naresh Singh Pal, R/o Ward No
9 P O Taranagar Dist Churu
18. Ashwini Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Ramavtar Sharma, R/o
Plot No 46 Parshuram Nagar Near C M Place Churu
19. Asif Khan S/o Sh. Basir Khan, R/o Ward No 21 Mangla
Colony Churu
20. Bhagwat Prasad Jangid S/o Sh. Murari Lal Jangid, Aged
About 34 Years, A Santosh Nagar Baran Road Kota
21. Bhanwar Lal S/o Sh. Hari Ram Vishnoi, R/o Vill Vagawas
Post Jatu Tel Bagoda Jalor
22. Bhanwar Lal Budaniyan S/o Sh. Mukh Ram Budaniyan,
R/o Vill Gajsar Post Ghantel Dist Churu
23. Bhanwara Ram Thalor S/o Sh. Birda Ram, R/o Vill Khuri
Nimbi Post Barangana Teh Didwana Dist Nagaur
24. Bheru Lal Jat S/o Sh. Nathu Lal Jat, R/o Vpo Bheemgarh
Teh Rashmi Dist Chittorgarh
25. Bhoop Singh Poonia S/o Sh. Bhader Ram, R/o Vill
Sardarpura Khalsa Post Kanwani Teh Rawatsar Dist
Hanumangarh
26. Bhoor Singh Meena S/o Sh. Ram Singh Meena, R/o Vpo
Ganwadi Meena Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli
27. Chandra Shekhar Meena S/o Sh. Jassu Ram Meena, R/o
Vpo Sirohi Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar
28. Charan Singh S/o Sh. Om Prakash, R/o Vill Bhagwan
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (45 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Post Daidas Teh Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
29. Chena Ram S/o Sh. Bhanwar Singh, R/o Vill Kurli Teh
Didwana Dist Nagaur
30. Chetan Prakash Saini S/o Sh. Mali Ram Saini, R/o Vpo
Mawanda Khurd Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar
31. Damodar Prasad Verma S/o Sh. Sohan Lal Verma, R/o
Vpo Ringas Teh Shri Madhopur Dist Sikar
32. Deshraj Gurjar S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Gurjar, Vill Daulaj
R/o Post Tevori Teh Viratnagar Dist Jaipur
33. Dharmendra Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Jagram Meena, R/o
127 Kanga Patti Shyampur Mundawari Post Mahu
Ghonsla Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli
34. Dharmendra Maurya S/o Sh. Ram Swaroop Maurya, R/o
Vill Shriya Post Amarabad Teh Ramgarh Pachawara Dist
Dausa
35. Dinesh Kumar Mal S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Mal, R/o Vpo
Delwara Lokiya, Teh Ghatol Dist Banswara
36. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Mohanlal Meena, R/o Vpo
Terrath Teh Talera Dist Bundi
37. Durga Singh Gaud S/o Sh. Bhagwan Singh, R/o Vill
Gourpura (Nabipura) Post Beswa Teh Fatehpur Dist Sikar
38. Gajender Kumar S/o Sh. Dharamveer Yadav, R/o Vill
Narera Khurd Post Aklimpur Teh Neemrana Dist Alwar
39. Ganesh Lal Meghwa S/o Sh. Uday Lal Meghwal, R/o
Nainwa Road Indra Colony Bundi
40. Giriraj Prasad Sharma S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Sharma, R/o
Vpo Pragpura Teh Paota Dist Jaipur
41. Govind Krishana Swami S/o Sh. Murlidhar Swami, R/o
Vill Pirer Post Jaitsisar Teh Sardharshahar Dist Churu
42. Hanuman Choudhary S/o Sh. Jeetmal Mudel, R/o Ward
No 2 Marwar, Mundel, Dist Nagaur
43. Hari Charan Meena S/o Sh. Murari Lal Meena, R/o Vill
Khedi Ghatam Post Jhareda Teh Hindaun City Dist
Karauli
44. Hari Ram Yadav S/o Sh. Laxminarayan Yadav, R/o Vpo
Khedi Milak Teh Kishangarh Renwal Dist Jaipur
45. Harkesh Meena S/o Sh. Narayan Lal Meena, R/o Vpo
Salempura Teh Rahuwas Dist Dausa
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (46 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
46. Harphool Jat S/o Sh. Kana Ram, R/o Dhani Gainanowali
Bhandhawala Bhopalpura Post Guhala Teh Neem Ka
Thana Dist Sikar
47. Hemlata Kumawat D/o Sh. Chothmal Kumawat, R/o 88
Krishna Nagar Officer Inclave Jhotwara Jaipur
48. Hemraj Mahawar S/o Sh. Gopal Lal, R/o Vpo Didawana
Near Govt Sr Sec School Didwana Teh Lalsot Dist Dausa
49. Hira Lal Prajapat S/o Sh. Shankar Lal, R/o Vill Johar
Khera Post Beawar Khas Via Beawar Dist Ajmer
50. Jagdish Chandra S/o Sh. Ami Lal, R/o Vpo Deeplana Teh
Nohar Dist Hanuumangarh
51. Jai Kishan Meena S/o Sh. Hari Ram Meena, R/o Vpo
Thanagazi Teh Thanagazi Dist Alwar
52. Jairam Meena S/o Sh. Dhansi Ram Meena, R/o Vpo
Ballupura Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar
53. Jaypal Singh Rana S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Rana, R/o Vpo
Borda Teh Ganoda Dist Banswara
54. Jeevan Lal Verma S/o Sh. Ram Sahaya Balai, R/o Vpo
Agar Teh Thanagazi Dist Alwar
55. Jitendra Choudhary S/o Sh. Gopi Lal Choudhary, R/o
Nagliya Mod Post Gadriyawas Teh Dharyawad Dist
Pratapgarh
56. Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Manohar Lal Sharma,
R/o Vill Tahatada Post Jatwara Teh Bassi Dist Jaipur
57. Kailash Chand Jat S/o Sh. Ram Kishor, R/o Vill
Ramnagar Post Aliyari Teh Todaraisingh Dist Tonk
58. Kamlesh Kumar Jat S/o Sh. Bhagwan Sahai Jat, R/o Vpo
Singod Khurd Teh Chomu Dist Jaipur
59. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Prabhu Dayal Meena,
R/o Vill Galawas Post Jodhula Via Maid Dist Jaipur.
60. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Rampratap Meena, R/o
Vill Udaipura Post Chudiyawas, Teh Nangal Rajawatan,
Dist Dausa
61. Karan Singh S/o Sh. Kishor Kumar, R/o Vill Tanwra Ki
Dhani Post Santhalpur Teh Bansur Dist Alwar
62. Karan Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Ramraj Gurjar, R/o Vill
Arpura Teh Bamanwas Dist Sawai Madhopur
63. Karansingh Charpota S/o Sh. Prakash Chandra
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (47 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Charpota, R/o Vill Nanikasath Post Lohariya Bada Teh
Kushalgarh Dist Banswara
64. Kedar Lal Meena S/o Sh. Ram Sahay Meena, R/o Vill
Medkapura Post Kheda Jamalpur Teh Hindaun City Dist
Karauli
65. Kuldeep Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Mahesh Narayan
Sharma, R/o Parshuram Colony Behind Hospital Rajgarh
Alwar
66. Lal Chand Deegwal S/o Sh. Mukunda Ram Deegwal, R/o
Vpo Divrala Teh Shrimadhopur Dist Sikar
67. Lal Chand Verma S/o Sh. Prahalad Ram Verma, R/o Vpo
Kariri Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur
68. Lokendra Kalal S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Kalal, R/o Hari Om
Nagar Vill Kushalmagri Post Bildi Dist Dungarpur
69. Lokesh Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Ramesh Chandra
Sharma, R/o Vpo Chauth Ka Barwara Dist Sawai
Madhopur
70. Madan Lal Bhahada S/o Sh. Kalu Ram Bhahada, R/o Vill
Kanwarasa Post Kajipura Via Sambhar Lake Dist Jaipur
71. Mahendra Jajra S/o Sh. Gordhan Ram, R/o Vpo Sinod
Teh And Dist Nagaur
72. Mahendra Kumar S/o Sh. Ganga Ram Harijan, R/o Vill
Basai Beerthal Post Machhroli Teh Kishangarh Bas Dist
Alwar
73. Mahendra Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Bhairun Ram Yadav, R/o
Vill I Dhan Ka Bas Post Pachar Via Kalwar Dist Jaipur
74. Mahendra Singh Palawat S/o Sh. Gauri Dan Singh, R/o
Vill Charanwas Post Karansar Via Renwal Dist Jaipur
75. Mahesh Chand Meena S/o Sh. Gopi Ram Meena, R/o Vill
Bisuni Post Bamanwas Chaugan Teh Thanagazi Dist
Alwar
76. Mahesh Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Mangu Ram Yadav, R/o
Vpo Nathi Ka Bas Tahsil Kinangarh Renwal Jaipur
77. Makkhan Lal Singer S/o Sh. Bal Ram Singer, R/o Vpo
Abhawas Khandela Dist Sikar
78. Mala Ram S/o Sh. Jetha Ramarjiyana, R/o Teh Siwana
Dist Badmer
79. Mali Ram Yadav S/o Sh. Umrav Yadav, R/o Vpo Bagawas
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (48 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Ahiran Teh Virat Nagar Dist Jaipur
80. Maliram Yadav S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Yadav, R/o Vpo
Sirsali Teh Amer Dist Jaipur
81. Manju Lata D/o Sh. Mohan Lal Dotaniya, R/o B 25 Hasan
Kha Mewat Nagar Dist Alwar
82. Manoj Kumar S/o Sh. Mohan Lal, R/o Vpo Nand Teh
Malsisar Dist Jhunjhunu
83. Manoj Kumar S/o Sh. Dayanand Singh, R/o B 185
Sector -1 Sainik Basti Churu
84. Manoj Kumar Ojha S/o Sh. Bhawani Shanker Ojha, R/o
Vpo Kanechhan Kalan Teh Fuliya Kalan Dist Bhilwara
85. Meetha Lal Meena S/o Sh. Gopi Lal Meena, R/o Vill
Khajura Post Karwar Teh Nainwa Dist Bundi
86. Meghram Meena S/o Sh. Mani Ram Meena, R/o Vpo
Katkar (Musayare) Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli
87. Mohan Lal Kalkal S/o Sh. Bhagirath Prasad Kakal, R/o
Vpo Rampura Bass Teh And Dist Churu
88. Mohan Lal Meena S/o Sh. Bhagwan Sahay Meena, R/o
Vill Khijuriya Tiwadiyan Post Khatepura Teh Bassi Dist
Jaipur
89. Mohit Singh S/o Sh. Mahendra Singh, R/o Vpo Karnikot
Teh Mundawar Dist Alwar
90. Mukesh Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Karan, R/o Ward No 30
Near Govt College Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
91. Mukesh Kumar Bhahada S/o Sh. Kalu Ram Bhahada, R/o
Vill Kanwarasa Post Kajipura Via Sambhar Lake Dist
Jaipur
92. Mukesh Kumar Kunderwal S/o Sh. Roopnarayan
Choudhary, R/o Vpo Pt No 52 Subhash Nagar Sarpanch
Colony Tonk
93. Mukesh Kumar Nagar S/o Sh. Shyoji Lal Nagarv, R/o
Toda Ka Gothra Post Sitapura Tehsil Deoli Tonk
94. Mukesh Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Omkar Mal, R/o Vill
Rajpura Post Bidara Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur
95. Nagendra Singh Yadav S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand Yadav,
R/o Vill Rendayal Turk Post Rendayal Gurjar Teh
Wazirpur Dist Sawai Madhopur
96. Nand Kishor Meena S/o Sh. Manohar Lal Meena, R/o Vpo
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (49 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Kalwan Teh Sikrai Dist Dausa
97. Naresh Kumar Bagoriya S/o Sh. Nathu Lal Regar, R/o
Vpo Mandfiya Teh Bhadesar Dist Chittorgarh
98. Naveen Kumar Danewa S/o Sh. Pramod Kumar Danewa,
R/o Vpo Bharu Dist Jhunjhunu.
99. Neelkamal Sharma S/o Sh. Subhash Chand Sharma, R/o
Vpo Tehla Teh Tehla Dist Alwar
100. Neemba Ram Parihar S/o Sh. Bhoora Ram Parihar, R/o
Vill Dudabery Post Malwa Teh And Dist Badmer
101. Neeraj Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Kalyan Prasad Meena, R/o
Vpo Kamalpura Teh Todabhim Dist Karauli
102. Neeraj Meena S/o Sh. Shri Jai Lal Meena, R/o 203
Logpat Nagar Jagatpura Jaipur
103. Nitesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Sh. Babulal Kumawat, R/o
Vpo Asalpur Teh Phulera Dist Jaipur
104. Om Prakash Gurjar S/o Sh. Rura Ram Gurjar, R/o Vill
Peplod Narayan Dhani Redan Post Devipura Teh Sahpura
Dist Jaipur
105. Phoolchand Verma S/o Sh. Badri Lal Verma, R/o Vpo
Khanpur Shitala Mata Chauk Teh Khanpur Dist Jhalawar
106. Prahlad Gujer S/o Sh. Ramswaroop Gujer, R/o Vpo
Khandar Dist Sawai Madhopur
107. Prakash Chand S/o Sh. Narayan Lal, R/o Gopal Bhavan
Suriya Colony Post Ranoli Teh Dantaramgarh Dist Sikar
108. Pramod Kumar Yaduvanshi S/o Sh. Brijmohan
Yaduvanshi, R/o Vill Mothpur Post Kalmanda Teh Dist
Baran
109. Prashant Choudhary S/o Sh. Ram Niwas Choudhary, R/o
H N 121 Dhiv Bhakto Ki Gali Vill Dohariya
110. Praveen Kumar Biban S/o Sh. Shishpal Singh, R/o Ward
No 30 Near N D B College Professor Colony Nohar Dist
Hanumangarh
111. Preeti Kanwar S/o Sh. Bhagat Singh, R/o 71 A Piyush
Path Kailash Nagar Jhotwara Jaipur
112. Prem Kumar S/o Sh. Madan Lal, R/o Sonari Road Ward
No 9 Near Aashmin Video Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
113. Priyanka Gothawal S/o Sh. Shiv Pal Singh, R/o Ward No
14 Bhebha Ram Nagar Colony Pathwari Ka Mohalla
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (50 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar
114. Raghunandan Pancholi S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma,
R/o Vpo Ghar Teh Dooni Dist Tonk
115. Rajender Prasad S/o Sh. Duni Ram, R/o Vpo Deidas Teh
Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
116. Rajender Singh S/o Sh. Sube Singh Yadav, R/o Vill Jajor
Ka Bass, Post Kithoor, Teh And Dist Alwar
117. Rajendra Dhakad S/o Sh. Omprakash Nagar, R/o Vill
Bawdi Kheda Post Khopar Teh Chhabra Dist Baran
118. Rajendra Kumar S/o Sh. Kani Ram Paliwal, R/o Vpo
Chhila Teh Lohawat Dist Jodhpur
119. Rajendra Singh Yadav S/o Sh. Mahaveer Prasad Yadav,
R/o D-1-10 Madhukar Garh Colony Kotputali Dist Jaipur
120. Rajesh Dhenwal S/o Sh. Kishan Lal Dhenwal, R/o P No
13A Acfc Colony Ratnada Jodhpur
121. Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh. Ramawtar, R/o Vpo Khohari Tehsil
Bansur Dist Alwar
122. Rajesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Tejpal, R/o Plot No 90
B Shiv Watika Colony Govindpura Kalwar Road Jaipur
123. Rajesh Pareek S/o Sh. Bhairu Lal Pareek, R/o H N No 40
Near Kashipuri Shyam Mandir Shastri Nagar Bhilwara
124. Raju Jajoriya S/o Sh. Ramdev Jajoriya, R/o Vill Bairawas
Post Bane Ka Barkhera Teh Dausa Dist Dausa
125. Raju Ram Prajapat S/o Sh. Shreechand Prajapat, R/o
Ward No 8 Lunkaransar Teh Lunkaransar Dist Bikaner
126. Rajveer Poonia S/o Sh. Shyopal Singh, R/o Vpo
Meharadasi Via Mandawa Jhunjhunu.
127. Ram Niwas Kaswan S/o Sh. Bhinwa Ram, R/o Vill
Kaswan Ki Dhani Post Maroth Teh Nawa Dist Nagaur
128. Ram Pal S/o Sh. Raja Ram, R/o Vpo Peerkamria Teh
Tibbi Dist Hanumangarh
129. Ram Prakash Meena S/o Sh. Rang Lal Meena, R/o B 97
Malviya Nagar Alwar
130. Ramesh Kumar S/o Sh. Shri Om Prakash Khichar, R/o
Chakbash Post Bharu Teh Mandawa Jhunjhunu
131. Ramesh Kumar Bunkar S/o Sh. Durga Prasad Bunkar,
R/o Vpo Gudlia Via Badhal Teh Chomu Dist Jaipur
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (51 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
132. Ramji Lal Bairwa S/o Sh. Lakshmi Narayan Bairwa, R/o
Vill Jailampura Post Khanwas Teh Lawan Dist Dausa
133. Ramkaran Jat S/o Sh. Chhitar Mal Jat, R/o Vill
Maheshpura Post Jairampura Teh Amer Dist Jaipur
134. Ratan Lal Meena S/o Sh. Shrikishan Meena, R/o Vill
Bhaglai, The And Dist. Dausa
135. Ravi Kumar Sirawata S/o Sh. Rameshwar Lal, R/o Surya
Nagar Po Losal Dist Sikar
136. Ravi Prakash Meena S/o Sh. Ratti Ram Meena, R/o Vpo
Shafipura Tehsil Bamanwas District Sawai Madhopur
137. Ravindra Kumar S/o Sh. Mamla Ram Jatav, R/o Vill
Chakoliya Post Mator Teh Mundawar Dist Alwar
138. Ravindra Kumar Ray S/o Sh. Amar Singh Jatav, R/o Vpo
Baragma Teh Shri Mahavirji Dist Karauli
139. Sahil Choudhary S/o Sh. Kailash Choudhary, R/o Vpo
Khoraladkhani Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur
140. Sanjay Choudhary S/o Sh. Kalu Ram Choudhary, R/o Vill
Tatiyawas Post Rampura Teh Amer Dist Jaipur
141. Sanjay Jain S/o Sh. Bheru Lal Jain, R/o Vpo Kherot Ram
Mandir Ke Pas Teh And Dist Pratapgarh
142. Satish Chand Mahawar S/o Sh. Vishvmbhar Mahawar,
R/o Vill Khanpur Post Kariri Teh Todabhim Dist Karauli
143. Satya Pal S/o Sh. Ram Chandra, R/o Vpo Kaswali Teh
Laxmangarh Dist Sikar
144. Satyawati S/o Sh. Chetan Lal Morodia, R/o Vpo
Neemrana Teh Neemrana Dist Alwar
145. Seema Kumari Yadav D/o Sh. Mahesh Kumar Yadav, R/o
Chomu Dist Jaipur
146. Shankar Lal Meena S/o Sh. Shri Parta Ram Meena, R/o
Vill Padak Chhali Post Pratapgarh Teh Thanagazi Dist
Alwar
147. Shiv Prasad Meena S/o Sh. Ram Swaroop Meena, R/o
Vpo Dhanawar Teh Baswa Dist Dausa
148. Sohan Lal Verma S/o Sh. Chiranji Lal Verma, R/o 295
Jata Pada Purani Tonk Dist Tonk
149. Subhash S/o Sh. Mansingh, R/o Vpo Baijuwa Teh
Rajgarh Dist Churu
150. Subhash Kumar S/o Sh. Bhagirath Mal, R/o Dhani
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (52 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Sutliya Wali Post Jalpali Teh Shrimadhopur Dist Sikar
151. Subhash Poonia S/o Sh. Ramchandra Poonia, R/o Vill
Shyopura Post Depalsar Teh Dist Churu
152. Sumer Singh Kalash S/o Sh. Maru Ram Kalash, R/o
Dhani Burganala Ki Vpo Jeelo Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist
Sikar
153. Sumit Kumar Jat S/o Sh. Nand Lal Jat, R/o Vpo Sodawas
Teh Mundawar Dist Alwar
154. Sunil Dayal S/o Sh. Shimbhu Dayal, R/o Ward No 11
Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar
155. Sunil Kumar Haidiya S/o Sh. Kajor Mal, R/o D 303
Jagdamba Nagar Behind Heerapura Power House Ajmer
Road Jaipur
156. Sunil Meena S/o Sh. Girraj Prasad Meena, R/o Vill Arniya
Post Nogav Teh Gangapur City Dist Sawai Madhopur
157. Sunita Choudhary D/o Sh. Suraj Mal Choudhary, R/o Vill
Kapdiyawas Post Durjniyawas Teh Kalwar Jhotwara
Jaipur
158. Surendra Kumar S/o Sh. Yad Ram Yadav, R/o Vill
Rasulpur, Post Pacheri Bari Teh Buhana Dist Jhunjhunu
159. Surendra Kumar Badesar S/o Sh. Surta Ram, R/o Vpo
Gorir Teh Khetri Dist Jhunjhunu
160. Surendra Singh Samota S/o Sh. Rameshwar Lal Samota,
R/o Vill Trilokpura Post Sihodi Teh Shrimadhopur Dist
Sikar
161. Suresh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Ram Lal Meena, R/o Plot
No 140 (S.w.b) Naya Bass Dist Alwar
162. Suresh Kumar Todawata S/o Sh. Kalu Ram, R/o Vill
Boythawalw Jhotwara Jaipur Dist Jaipur
163. Suresh Yadav S/o Sh. Mangal Chand Yadav, R/o 20,
Rathore Marg, Vivekanand Colony, Naya Khera,
Ambabari, Jaipur.
164. Swati Choudhary D/o Sh. Begraj Singh, R/o Vpo Abusar
Teh Jhunjhunu Dist Jhunjhunu
165. Tshayp Singh S/o Sh. Omprakash Yadav, R/o Vill Kani
(Tigaon) Post Jonal Teh Kotkasim Dist Alwar
166. Umesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Sh. Shri Rampal Kumawat,
R/o Vpo Manoharpur Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (53 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
167. Ummed Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Chhaju Lal Gurjar, R/o Vpo
Torda Teh Baharawanda Dist Dauda
168. Veepi Singh D/o Sh. Shri Rambeer Singh, R/o Vpo
Kharagpur Teh Saipau Dist Dholpur
169. Vijay Singh S/o Sh. Mool Chand, R/o Ward 28 Kali
Bhatta Ke Pas Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
170. Vikash Kumar S/o Sh. Surajbhan Mahala, R/o Vpo
Jankipura Vaya Jajor Kheri Teh Khandela Dist Sikar
171. Vishnu Dev Meena S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Meena, R/o Rest
House Road Mandrin Mohalla Rajgarh Dist Alwar
172. Yashpal Kumar Beniwal S/o Sh. Bajrang Lal Beniwal, R/o
Plot No B 19 Sector No 4 Near Pankha Circle Senik Basti
Churu
173. Yogesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Phool Chand Meena, R/o
Vill Raopura Post Bhuranpura Jatan Teh Jamwaramgarh
Dist Jaipur
174. Shailendra Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Sumer Singh Gurjar,
R/o Vil Bhojpura Post Kailai Teh Sikrai Dist Dausa
175. Samunder Singh S/o Sh. Ada Ram, R/o Vpo Badbirana
Teh Nohar Dist Hanumangarh
176. Amjad Khan Pathan S/o Sh. Chhitar Khan Pathan, R/o
Vill Doongri Kalan Teh Jobner Dist Jaipur.
177. Babli Jatav D/o Shri Chand Jatav, Resident Of Vpo Alipur,
Tehsil Bhusawar, Dist. Bharatpur.
178. Udai Singh Bhada S/o Sumer Singh Bhada, Resident Of
House No. 39, Shorya Vatika Ext. Niwaru, Jothwara.
179. Anil Kumar Nagar S/o Kishan Gopal Nagar, Village
Nagarganj, Post Balapura, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi.
180. Ram Niwas Gurjar S/o Keshar Lal Gurjar, Resident Of
Kanwarpura, Post Niwariya, Tehsil Deoli, District Tonk.
181. Bhanwar Lal Ghasil S/o Laxman Ram Ghasil, Resident Of
Village Murlipura, District Jaipur.
182. Gajendra Singh S/o Sh Sardar Singh, Resident Of 10,
Pahalwan Niwas, Geeta Colony, Near Msj College,
Bharatpur.
183. Aaditya Sahoo S/o Sh Giriraj Sahoo, Village And Post
Bamangaon, Tehsil Nainwa, Dist. Bundi.
184. Premveer S/o Sh Veermaram, Tehsil And District
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (54 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Barmer.
185. Manmohan Singh S/o Tejprakash Gurjar, Village And
Post Mundota, Amer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary,
Department Of Personnel, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary,
Department Of Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
3. Director, Department Of Education, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Bhandari, Sr. Adv., through
V.C. assisted by Mr. Ankit Tater and
Mr. Madhusudan Singh Rajpurohit.
Dr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Adv. through V.C.
assisted by Mr. Sachin Saraswat and
Mr. Parikshit Singh
Mr. Hanuman Singh, through V.C.
Mr. Vivek Shrimali, through V.C.
assisted by Ms. Yukti Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur, Sr. Adv., assisted by
Mr. Divik Mathur and
Mr. Harish Purohit
Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG
Mr. S.S. Rathore, AAG assisted by
Mr. Yuvraj Singh Rathore.
Mr. Tushar Thanvi for
Mr. S.S. Ladrecha
Mr. Vivek Shrimali (in SAW 461/23)
assisted by Ms. Yukti Joshi
Mr. C.S. Kotwani assisted by
Mr. Abhijeet Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA
Judgment
1. Date of conclusion of Arguments 25.03.2026
2. Date on which the judgment was reserved 25.03.2026
3. Whether the full judgment or only operative
Full
part is pronounced
4. Date of pronouncement 08.07.2026
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (55 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Per, Justice Ravi Chirania:-
Reportable
1. The instant batch of writ petitions has been filed by the
petitioners, who were appointed as School Lecturers by the
respondents pursuant to the advertisement dated 16.10.2015
issued by the respondent No. 3-Rajasthan Public Service
Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘Commission’, for short)
whereby several posts of School Lecturers in various subjects were
advertised. Petitioners, being eligible, participated in the selection
process for their respective subjects and their names were
recommended by the Commission for appointment on different
dates. Thereafter, the subject wise select lists were forwarded to
the respondent-State Government, i.e. the Appointing Authority,
which after completing necessary formalities, including document
verification, issued subject-wise appointment orders. The
petitioners were appointed on different dates during the period
from October, 2016 to December, 2017.
The issue as raised in these petitions was challenged and
accordingly writ petitions and special appeals were filed at
Principal Seat, Jodhpur as well as Bench at Jaipur. Details of the
petitions as filed at the respective places are as under:-
Filed at Principal Seat, Jodhpur
S.
Writ No. Title
No.
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Poonam Soni @ Poonam Upadhyay
1.
1408/2023 v The State of Rajasthan
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Harihar Rajpurohit v The State of
2.
167/2023 Rajasthan
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (56 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Pawan Kumar v The State of
3.
246/2023 Rajasthan
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Sunil Choudhary v The State of
4.
11975/2024 Rajasthan
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
5. Surendra v The State of Rajasthan
907/2023
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Surendra Kumar v State of
6.
1332/2023 Rajasthan
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Kuldeep Choudhary v State of
7
2012/2023 Rajasthan
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
8. Suresh Kumar v State of Rajasthan
7146/2023
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. State of Rajasthan v Ajay Kumar
9.
461/2023 Rohila
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. Madan Mohan Sharma v State of
10.
119/2025 Rajasthan
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. Ramniwas Bagria v The State of
11.
1323/2025 Rajasthan
Filed at Bench at Jaipur
S.
Writ No. Title
No.
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
1. Sunil Mishra v State of Rajasthan
6281/2022
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Pradeep Kumar Khanagwal v The
2.
895/2023 State of Rajasthan
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. Dr. Ram Swaroop Jat v State of
3.
1488/2020 Rajasthan
As the issue was common in all the above, so were ordered
to be tagged and were listed before the Bench at Jaipur and were
heard and decided together.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, after their
appointment to the post of School Lecturer, they became eligible
for promotion to the post of Vice Principal, for which usually a
combined inter-se-seniority list is prepared by the respondents-
State and thereafter, promotions are made on the basis of
seniority list, which is prepared on the basis of respective merit as
per applicable Rules. However, as the respondent failed to
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (57 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
prepare the inter-se-seniority list in a fair, proper and lawful
manner as a result whereof, their seniority has been pushed
down/adversely affected and also their year of selection has also
been changed. It was contended that several candidates, who
were either less meritorious or whose results were declared
subsequent to those of the petitioners herein, have been assigned
higher seniority in the list merely on the ground that their
appointment orders were issued earlier to that of the petitioners
herein by the respondent.
3. Since, the facts involved in all the petitions are common,
therefore, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.246/2023 is taken as a lead
case and the facts as mentioned in the case are taken for deciding
the controversy involved in the present batch of petitions.
DBCWP No.246/2023
4. The instant writ petition has been filed by fifteen petitioners,
who acquired their respective degrees, applied for selection to the
post of School Lecturer (Physics), pursuant to the advertisement
dated 16.10.2015, which were stated to be correct and thereafter,
appeared in the selection process and successfully cleared the
same.
5. Mr. Manoj Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel submitted
that they have made the following prayer in the writ
petition:-
“(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
impugned proviso 1 to Rule 36 of the Rules of
2021 with regard to the determination of seniority
in the same selection to be made in accordance
with the list prepared in Rules 28, may kindly be
declared ultra vires the constitution of India and(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (58 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]be declared illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and
be quashed and set aside.
(ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annex-9) may
kindly be ordered to be re-casted and modified
and the seniority list in the present form, may
kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set
aside.
(iii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents be directed to assign seniority to the
petitioners in accordance with their respective
merit in each subject which should be the criteria
for inter se seniority across different subjects
included in one and the same selection process.
(iv) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents be directed to provide merit as
criteria for interlace seniority across different
subjects recruited through one and same selection
process;
(v) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents be directed to prepare inter-se
seniority list for the post of school Lecturer based
upon merit the subjects for promotion to the posts
of Vice-Principal.
(vi) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents be directed to consider and promote
the petitioners on the post of Vice-Principal with all
consequential benefits from the date of less
meritorious candidates across the subjects have
been promoted as Vice-Principal.
(vii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents may kindly be directed to prepare the
inter se seniority list for the post of School
Lecturer based upon the merit and subjects for
promotion to the post of Vice-Principal and to
consider and promote the petitioners on the post
of Vice-Principal with all consequential benefits
from the date of less meritorious candidates across(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (59 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]the subjects have been promoted as Vice-Principal
with all consequential benefits and directions.
(viii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction,
the respondents be directed to prepare the correct
seniority list of School Lecturers by laying down
appropriate criteria of assignment of seniority as
per the Rules without giving emphasis on the date
of sending the names/ lists by the RPSC to the
appointing authority.
(ix) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents be restrained to hold any furthe
promotions till the seniority list dated 21.11.2022
(Annex-9) is re-casted which has been issued for
the years 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively and
the respondents be restrained to hold DPC for the
year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively on the
post of Vice-Principal till the final disposal of the
writ petition.
(x) Any other appropriate order or direction which
this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly
be passed in favour of the petitioner.
(xi) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be
awarded to the petitioner.”
6. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Manoj Bhandari, submitted that
the petitioners herein applied for the post of School Lecturer for
subject (Physics), of which a total of 822 vacancies were
advertised. He further submitted that the Commission declared
the results for the subject (Physics) on 18.09.2016 and
forwarded its recommendations to the State on 25.10.2016. The
counseling was conducted on 03.11.2016/04.11.2016, however,
the appointment orders could not be issued as the selection
process came to be stalled on account stay in the pending
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (60 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
litigation pertaining to the selection process, before this Hon’ble
High Court.
7. He further submitted that the result of certain other subjects,
namely Political Science, English, Hindi, History, Commerce,
Physics, Biology, Home Science, Geography, Sanskrit etc. were
also challenged before the Hon’ble High Court, due to which, the
entire selection process for those subjects also came to be stalled
and therefore, the appointment orders could not be issued for all
such subjects.
As far as the remaining subjects are concerned namely,
Rajasthani, Music, Sindhi, Mathematics, Philosophy, Drawing,
Chemistry, the results and the selection process were not put to
challenge. Accordingly, the results of those subjects were declared
between 01.09.2016 to 29.09.2016; the counseling for the said
subjects was conducted between 17.10.2016 to 23/26.10.2016,
and appointment orders were also issued on the respective dates.
It was further submitted that candidates who participated under
the same advertisement, were appointed as School Lecturers
prior to the petitioners and their seniority has been
counted/reckoned from the date of appointment, however, in
respect of the remaining subjects, where the result was under
challenge, the appointment orders could not be issued on time
despite the fact that in certain subjects counseling process had
already been completed by the respondent-Commission.
8. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the litigation, which
was pending before this High Court, attained finality, thereafter,
respondent-Commission declared the revised results on different
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (61 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
dates, i.e., between 29.05.2017 to 13.06.2017, as per its
convenience. On the basis of the revised results, the Commission
forwarded its recommendations to the respondent-State
Government. Thereafter, the first counseling was conducted for
certain subjects and in some cases, fresh counseling was
conducted on the basis of revised results. Ultimately, appointment
orders were issued for those remaining subjects during the period
from 09.06.2017 to 01.07.2017. He further submitted that on
account of variation in the dates of declaration of the results and
issuance of recommendations and stay order as passed by the
High Court in respect of certain subjects, a substantial gap
occurred in the issuance of appointment orders to candidates who
applied for various subjects of School Lecturer under the common
advertisement issued by the Commission. It was contended that
the respondent-State prepared the initial common seniority list
dated 15.05.2020 on the basis of the dates of appointment,
however, although the petitioners submitted their objections, the
same were not considered in accordance with law and the
seniority list was finalized and published without giving due
consideration to their objections.
9. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Bhandari further submitted that
the recruitment and selection to the post of School Lecturer, which
is governed by the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970
(hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 1970’ for short). It was
submitted that the respondent-State Government, in the year
2021, repealed Rajasthan Educational Service rules 1970 and the
Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 by way of
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (62 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
a notification dated 26.07.2021, and notified the Rajasthan
Educational (State and Subordinate) Service Rules, 2021,
(hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 2021’ for short), which came
into effect from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
Rule 46 of the Rules of 2021 is produced here as under:-
“46. Repeal and Saving- The Rajasthan
Educational Service Rules, 1970 and the Rajasthan
Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 and all
orders issued in relation to matters covered by these
rules and in force immediately before the
commencement of these rules are hereby repealed:
Provided that any action taken under the rules and
orders so repealed shall be deemed to have been
taken under the provisions of these rules.”
10. Mr. Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel further pointed out that
the services of the petitioners were initially governed by the Rules
of 1970 and their appointments were also made under the said
Rules. The relevant provisions of the Rules of 1970, namely Rules
26 and 28, are reproduced hereunder:-
“26. Appointments to the Service – Appointments
to the posts in the service by direct recruitment or by
promotion, as the case may be, shall be made by the
appointing authority on occurrence of substantive
vacancies by selection of persons in the manner
indicated in rule 22 or in rules 24 and 25:
Provided that if the appointing authority is satisfied
in consultation with the commission that no suitable
officer is available in the service for promotion to any
post or posts, it may fill that post by appointing an
officer on contract, or on deputation form the
Government of India or any other State Government
or by direct recruitment:
Provided further that in making such appointment
the provisions of the Rajasthan Public Service
Commission (limitations of functions) Regulation,
1951, shall be adhered to.
Provided further that the appointments to the posts
in Group ‘F’ by promotion shall be made from the(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (63 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]lists prepared under rule 24 and 25 in the ratio
prescribed under sub-rule (2) of rule 23.
28. Seniority- Seniority of persons appointed to the
lowest post of the Service of lowest categories of
post in each of the Group/ Section of the Service as
the case may be, shall be determined form the date
of confirmation of such persons to the said post but
in respect of persons appointed by promotion to
other higher posts in the Service or other higher
categories of posts in each of the Group/ Section in
the Service, as the case may be shall be determined
for the date of their regular selection to such posts.
Provided – (1) that the seniority interse of the
persons appointed to the service before the
commencement of these rules and/ or in the process
of integration of the service of the pre-reorganised
State of Rajasthan or the service of the new State of
Rajasthan established by the State Re-organisation
Act 1956 shall be determined, modified or altered by
the appointing authority on an adhoc basis;
(2) that if two or more persons are appointed to
posts in the same category in the same year, a
person appointed by promotion shall be senior to a
person appointed by direct recruitment;
(3) that the seniority interse of persons appointed to
posts in a particular category by direct recruitment
on the basis of one and the same selection, except
those who do not join service when a post is offered
to them, shall follow the order in which they have
been place in the list prepared by the Commission
under rule 20;
(4) that the seniority inter se of persons appointed to
posts in a particular category by promotion shall
follow the order in which they have been placed in
the lists prepared under rules 24 and 25;
(5) that the seniority inser se of the teacher in grade
II and teachers in grade I on promotions to the post
in Group „F‟ of Schedules I, II and III shall be
determined in the ratio of 4:1, respectively and that
these posts will be filled in the following cyclic order,
that is :-
A. First four : teachers in grade II.
B. Fifth : teachers in grade I on promotions as
mentioned above.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (64 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]C. Next four: teachers in grade II
D. Next : teachers in grade I on promotion as in B
E. Cycle to be repeated.
(6) that the seniority of persons appointed to posts
in group ‘F’ and the post of Lecturer of Government
Teachers Training Collage (sic College), Deputy
Inspector of Physical Education after selection by the
Committee under proviso 4 to rule 6, shall reckon
from the date of their selection by the Screening
Committee in the relevant Groups, Interse seniority
of these persons shall be as fixed by the committee.
(7) that the common seniority of persons appointed
to posts mentioned in Group ‘E’ and ‘F’ for promotion
to the posts in the Group ‘D’ shall be determined
with reference to the date of their substantive
appointments. The interse seniority of persons
selected by the Commission of Committee shall be as
indicated by the Commission or Committee. Inter se
seniority of persons selected against departmental
promotion quota shall be determined under rules 24
and 25.
(8) that the seniority inter se of officer in each group
of the service specified in Schedule I and II for
promotion to the posts included in Schedule III shall
be determined with reference to the date of their
substantive appointment on a post in such group.
The inter se seniority of officers selected by the
Departmental Promotion Committee unless
determined earlier will be determined on the basis of
length of continuous officiation on the post from
which promotion is made, except adhoc and
fortuitous provided further that the seniority of
members of the service for general institutions
included in schedule III irrespective of their earlier
promotion to the posts included in Schedule I or
Schedule II.
(9) that the persons selected and appointed as a
result of a selection, which is not subject to review
and revision, shall rank senior to the persons who
are selected and appointed as a result of subsequent
selection.
Seniority inter se of persons selected on the basis of
seniority-cum-merit and on the basis of merit in the
same selection shall be same as in the next below
grade.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (65 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
(10) Deleted.
(11) that the seniority of the persons absorbed as a
result of taking over of private institutions shall be
determined with reference to the year of absorption
of such persons and they shall rank junior to the
persons appointed by direct recruitment or by
promotion in the post is to be filled in by promotion
only in the relevant category during the year of their
appointment. The inter-se seniority of such persons
will, however, be fixed according to date of
continuous appointment in the same grade under
such management/ agency; provided that any
predetermined seniority shall not be disturbed. The
service rendered by the employees of private
institutions on an equated posts shall be counted as
experience or service required for promotion or
direct recruitment under these rules as the case may
be.
(12) that the Seniority of Head Masters, Secondary/
Higher Secondary Schools taken over by the
Government form Municipal Board/ Councils/
Corporation, shall be determined from the date of
their continuous appointment in the same grade in
Municipal Board/ Council/ Corporation, if they are
qualified to hold the posts, otherwise seniority shall
be fixed in the lower grade, for which they were
qualified.
@(9) that the persons selected and appointed as a
result of a selection which is not subject to review
and revision, shall rank senior to the persons who
are selected and appointed as result to subsequent
selection; „Seniority inter se of persons selected on
the basis of seniority-cum-merit shall be the same as
in the next below grade except in case of continued
officiation on higher posts when it shall be
accordance with the length of continued officiation,
provided that such officiation was not adhoc or
fortuitous.”
@ Substituted vide Notification No F 7 (6) Karmik
(Ka-II)/75/-II dated 13.10.1975 (effective form the
date of publication in the Raj parta i.e. 31.10.1975)
for-
£ (9) that the seniority inter se of persons appointed
by promotion to a particular class of posts on the
same date shall be the same as in the next below
grade, except in case of continued officiation on
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (66 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
higher posts when it shall be in accordance with the
length of such continued officiation if such officiation
was not adhoc or fortuitous.”
£ Added vide Notification No F 1 (26) Apptts
(A-II)/61 pt-II dated 25.9.75.
(13) That if a candidate belonging to the Scheduled
Casts/ Scheduled Tribe is promoted to an immediate
higher post/ grade against a reserved vacancy earlier
that his senior general / O.B.C. candidate who is
promoted later to the said immediate higher post/
grade, the general/O.B.C. candidate will regain his
seniority over such earlier promoted candidate will
regain his seniority over such earlier promoted
candidate of the Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe in
the immediate higher post/ grade.”
11. Learned Senior Counsel further argued that upon repeal of
the Rules of 1970 and after notification of Rules of 2021, the
services of the petitioners are now governed by the Rules of 2021
which came into effect from 26.07.2021. The relevant rules of the
Rules of 2021, i.e., Rules 4, 15, 28, 30, 32, 34 and including
impugned Rule 36 are reproduced hereunder:-
“4. Composition and strength of the Service.- (1) The
nature of posts included in the service shall be as
specified in column number 2 of Schedule-I or Schedule
II, as the case may be.
(2) The strength of the posts in the service shall be such
as may be determined by the Government, from time to
time.
(3) There shall be separate cadres in the service as
specified in the Groups of Schedule-I and Schedule II –
Provided that the Government may,-
(a) create any post(s) permanent or temporary, from
time to time, as may be found necessary and may abolish
any such post(s) in the like manner without thereby
entitling any person to any compensation; and
(b) leave unfilled or hold in abeyance or abolish or allow
to lapse any post, permanent or temporary, from time to
time, without thereby entitling any person to any
compensation.
15. Determination of vacancies.- (1) Subject to the
provisions of these rules, the Appointing Authority shall
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (67 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
determine on 1st April every year the actual number of
vacancies occurring during the financial year.
(2) Where a post is to be filled in by a single method as
prescribed in the Schedules, the vacancies so determined
shall be filled in by that method.
(3) Where a post is to be filled in by more than one
method as prescribed in the Schedules, the
apportionment of vacancies determined under sub-rule
(1) above to each such method shall be done maintaining
the prescribed proportion for the overall number of posts
already filled in. If any fraction of vacancies is left over
after apportionment of the vacancies in the manner
prescribed above, the same shall be apportioned to the
quota of various methods prescribed in a continuous
cyclic order giving precedence to the promotion quota.
(4) The Appointing Authority shall also determine the
vacancies of earlier years, year-wise, which were required
to be filled in by promotion, if such vacancies were not
determined and filled earlier in the year in which they
were required to be filled in.
28. Recommendations of the
Commission/Board/Committee/Appointing
Authority.-
The Commission/ Board or the Committee or the
Appointing Authority, as the case may be, shall prepare a
list of the candidates, whom they consider suitable for
appointment to the post concerned, arranged in the order
of merit on the basis of marks obtained in the written
examination/interview and forward the same to the
Appointing Authority. The Commission/Board or the
Committee or the Appointing Authority, as the case may
be, shall not recommend any candidate who has failed to
obtain a minimum of 40%marks in each of the papers of
the competitive examination:
Provided that,-
(i) the percentage fixed as above shall be relaxed by 5%
for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes.
(ii) the Commission/Board/Committee may also, to the
extent of 50% of the advertised vacancies, keep names of
suitable candidates on the reserve list category wise. The
Commission/ Board may on requisition, recommend
names of such candidates, in order of merit to the
Appointing Authority, within six months from the date on
which the original list is forwarded by them/it to the
Appointing Authority.
30. Selection by the Appointing Authority.- Subject to
the provisions of rule 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, the Appointing
Authority shall select candidates in the order of merit in
the list prepared under rule 28:
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (68 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]Provided that inclusion of a candidate’s name in the list
confers no right to appointment unless the Appointing
Authority is satisfied after such inquiry as may be
considered necessary that such candidate is suitable in all
other respects for appointment to the post concerned.
32. Criteria, Eligibility and Procedure for Promotion.-
(1) As soon as the Appointing Authority determines the
number of vacancies under rule 15 of these rules and
decides that a certain number of posts are required to be
filled in by promotion, it shall subject to the provisions of
sub-rule (6), prepare a correct and complete list of the
senior most persons who are eligible and qualified under
these rules for promotion on the basis of seniority cum
merit or merit.
The persons enumerated in column 6 of Schedule-1 or
Schedule-II, as the case may be, shall be eligible for
promotion to the post specified against them in column 2
thereof to the extent indicated in column 4 subject to their
possessing qualification and experience, on the first day of
the month of April of the year of selection, as specified in
column 7″”
Deleted Proviso”
(3) No person shall be considered for first promotion in the
service unless he/she is regularly selected on the post
from which promotion is to be made in accordance with
one of the methods of recruitment prescribed under the
provisions of these rules.
Explanation: In case direct recruitment to a post has been
made earlier than regular selection by promotion in a
particular year, such of the persons who are or were
eligible for appointment to that post by both the methods
of recruitment and have been appointed by direct
recruitment first, shall also be considered for promotion.
“(4) The person who had not been considered for
promotion up to the year 2019-2020 because he/she had
more than two children on or after 1 June 2002 shall be
considered for promotion from the date on which his/her
promotion was due and on such promotion his/her pay
shall be re-fixed at the pay which he/she would have
drawn but no arrear shall be paid and if any person who
has more than two children on or after 1st June, 2002
and his promotion becomes due in the year 2020-2021 or
thereafter shall be considered for promotion from the
date on which his/her promotion becomes due and
his/her pay shall be fixed for the promotional post, but
he/she shall be entitled for annual increment notionally
for three subsequent years and after such three years
he/she shall be allowed actual benefits of such
increments, however no arrears shall be paid for such
notional increments. There shall be no consequential
effect on subsequent promotions of the person promoted
as per provisions of this sub-rule. The person already(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (69 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]promoted shall not be reverted due to implementation of
this sub-rule:”
Provided that,-
(i) the person having more than two children shall not be
deemed to be disqualified for promotion so long as the
number of children he/she has on 1st June, 2002, does not
increase.
(ii) where a person has only one child from the earlier
delivery but more than one child are born out of a single
subsequent delivery, the children so born shall be deemed
to be one entity while counting the total number of
children.
(iii) while counting the total number of children of a
candidate, the child born from earlier delivery and having
disability shall not be counted.
(iv) any candidates who performed remarriage which is
not against any law and before such remarriage he is not
disqualified for promotion under this sub. rule, he shall not
be deemed to be disqualified with effect from 01.06.2002,
if any child is born out of single delivery from such
remarriage.”
(5) Selection for promotion on the post included in the
service shall be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit:
Provided that,-
(i) promotion on the highest post in the State service, if it
is at least third promotion, shall be made on the basis of
merit alone.
(ii) if the Committee is satisfied that suitable persons are
not available for selection by promotion to the post strictly
on the basis of merit in a particular year, selection by
promotion to the post on the basis of seniority- cum-merit
may be made in the same manner as specified in these
rules.
(6)(1) The zone of consideration of persons eligible for
promotion shall be as under:-
Number of Number of eligible
vacancies persons to be
considered
(a) for one five eligible
vacancy persons
(b) for two eight eligible
vacancies persons
(c) for three ten eligible
vacancies persons
(d) for four or three times the
more number of
vacancies vacancies.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (70 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
(ii) Where the number of eligible persons for promotion to
higher post is less than the number specified above all the
persons so eligible shall be considered.
(iii) Where adequate number of the candidates belonging
to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, as the
case may be, are not available within the zone of
consideration specified above, the zone of consideration
may be extended upto seven times the number of
vacancies and the candidates belonging to the Scheduled
Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, as the case may be, (and
not any other) coming within the extended zone of
consideration shall also be considered against the
vacancies reserved for them.
(iv) for any post in the service, except otherwise provided
in the schedules appended to these rules,-
(a) if promotion is from more than one category of posts in
the same Level in Pay Matrix, eligible persons upto two in
number from each category of posts in the same Level in
Pay Matrix, shall be considered for promotion.
(b) if promotion is from more than one category of posts
carrying different Level in Pay Matrix, eligible persons in
the higher Level of Pay Matrix, shall be considered for
promotion first and if no suitable person is available for
promotion on the basis of merit or seniority cum merit, as
the case may be, in the higher Level in Pay Matrix, than
only the eligible persons of other categories of posts in
lower Level in Pay Matrix, shall be considered for
promotion and so on and so forth. The zone of
consideration for eligibility in this case shall be limited to
five senior most eligible persons in all.
(7) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this rule, the
conditions of eligibility for promotion, constitution of the
Committee and procedure for selection shall be the same
as prescribed elsewhere in these rules.
(8) The Committee shall consider the cases of all the
senior most persons who are eligible and qualified for
promotion to the class of post(s) concerned under these
rules and shall prepare a list containing names of the
persons found suitable on the basis of seniority-cum-merit
or on the basis of merit, as the case may be, as per the
criteria for promotion laid down in these rules, equal to the
number of vacancies determined under these rules. The
list so prepared on the basis of seniority-cum-merit and/or
on the basis of merit, as the case may be, shall be
arranged in the order of seniority of the category of
post(s) from which selection is made.
(9) The Committee may also prepare a list on the basis of
seniority-cum-merit as the criteria foof seniority can dorit
in these rules containing names of persons not exceeding
the number of persons selected in the list prepared under
sub-rule (8) above to fill temporary or permanent(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (71 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]vacancies which may occur subsequently. The list so
prepared on the basis of seniority-cum-merit or on the
basis of merit, as the case may be, shall be arranged in of
seniority in the shall be reviewed and revised by the
Committee that meets in the subsequent year and that
such list shall remain in force till the end of the last day of
the year for which the meeting of the Committee is held.
(10) Lists prepared under sub-rule (8) and (9) shall be
sent to the Appointing Authority together with Annual
Performance Appraisal Reports/Annual Confidential
Reports and other service records of all the candidates
included in the lists as also of those not selected, if any.
Explanation: For the purpose of selection for promotion
on the basis of merit, no person shall be selected if he/she
does not have “Outstanding” or “Very Good” record of at
least four out of seven years proceeding the year for which
the meeting of the Committee is held.
(11) If in any subsequent year, after promulgation of
these rules, vacancies relating to any earlier year are
determined under these rules which were required to be
filled in by promotion, the Committee shall consider the
cases of all such persons who would have been eligible in
the year to which the vacancies relate irrespective of the
year in which the meeting of the Committee is held and
such promotion shall be governed by the criteria and
procedure for promotion as was applicable in the particular
year to which the vacancies relate and the
service/experience of an incumbent who has been so
promoted, for promotion to higher post for any period
during which he/she has not actually performed the duties
of the post to which he/she would have been promoted,
shall be counted. The pay of a person who has been so
promoted shall be re-fixed at the pay which he would have
derived at the time of his/her promotion but no arrears of
pay shall be allowed to him/her.
(12) The Government or the Appointing Authority may
order for the review of the proceedings of the Committee
held earlier on account of some mistake or error apparent
on the face of record, or on account of a factual error
substantially affecting the decision of the Committee or for
any other sufficient reasons e.g. change in seniority,
wrong determination of vacancies, judgment/direction of
any Court or Tribunal, or where adverse entries in the
Confidential Reports of an individual are expunged or
toned down or a punishment inflicted on him/her is set
aside or reduced. The concurrence of the Department of
Personnel and the commission (where Commission is
associated) shall always be obtained before holding the
meeting of the review Committee.
(13) Where consultation with the Commission is
necessary, the lists prepared by the Committee shall be
forwarded to the Commission by the Appointing Authority
along with the Annual Confidential Rolls/Annual
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (72 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Performance Appraisal Reports of all the persons whose
names have been considered by the Committee.
(14) The Commission shall consider the lists prepared by
the committee along with other relevant documents
received from the Appointing Authority and unless any
(14) The Commission shall consider the lists prepared by
the committee along change is considered necessary shall
approve the lists. In case the Commission considers it
necessary to make any change in the lists received from
the Appointing Authority, it shall inform the Appointing
Authority of the changes proposed by it. After taking into
account the comments of the Commission, if any, the
Appointing Authority may approve the lists finally with
such modification as may, in its opinion, be just and
proper and when the Appointing Authority is an authority
subordinate to the Government, the lists approved by the
Commission shall be disturbed only with the approval of
the Government.
(15) Appointments shall be made by the Appointing
Authority taking persons out of the lists finally approved
under sub-rule (14) in the order in which they have been
placed in the lists, till such lists are exhausted or reviewed
and revised or remain in force, as the case may be.
(16) The Government may issue instructions for
provisionally dealing with promotions, appointments or
other ancillary matters in an equitable and fair manner of
persons who may be under suspension or against whom
departmental proceedings is under progress at the time
promotions are considered to a post to which they are
eligible or would have been eligible but for such
suspension or pendency of such enquiry or proceedings.
(17) The provisions of this rule shall have effect
notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained else
wherein any provision of these rules.
34. Appointment to the service.- Appointment to the
post in the service by direct recruitment or by promotion,
as the case may be, shall be made by the Appointing
Authority on occurrence of substantive vacancies from the
candidates selected under rule 28 in order of merit and by
promotion from the persons selected under rule 32 of
these rules.
36. Seniority.- Seniority of persons appointed to the
post encadred in the service shall be determined
from the date of appointment on the post after
regular selection in accordance with the provisions
of these rules. Appointment on ad hoc or urgent
temporary basis shall not be deemed to be
appointment after regular selection:
Provided that,
(1) the inter-se seniority of persons appointed to a
post in a particular category by direct recruitment(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (73 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]on the basis of one and the same selection, except
those who do not join Service when a post is offered
to them within a period of six weeks from the date
of issue of order or longer, if extended by the
Appointing Authority, shall follow the order in which
their names have been placed in the list prepared
under rule 28.
(2) if two or more persons are appointed to the
service during the same year, a person appointed by
promotion shall rank senior to a person appointed by
direct recruitment.
(3) the persons selected and appointed as a result of a
selection, which is not subject to review and revision, shall
rank senior to the persons who are selected and appointed
as a result of subsequent selection.
(4) the seniority inter-se of persons selected on the basis
of seniority cum merit and on the basis of merit in the
same selection shall be the same as in the next lower
grade.
(5) the seniority inter-se of the persons adjudged suitable
under sub-rule (3) of rule 6 shall be determined according
to their length of continuous service and they shall en-bloc
rank junior to all the persons appointed regularly by direct
recruitment or by promotion upto the date of the
commencement of these rules.
(6) interlacing of seniorities maintained by different
ranges/divisions/appointing authorities on a post, for the
purpose of promotion to the next higher post in the
regular line of promotion, shall be made on the basis of
dates of joining by the candidates to the post irrespective
of placement in the seniority list maintained by the range/
division/ appointing authority concerned.”
12. Learned Senior Counsel further contended that after the
appointment of petitioners on the respective dates, they were duly
confirmed on their respective posts and subject wise seniority list
came to be prepared. The grievance as raised by the petitioners is
that under the Rules of 2021, they are eligible for promotion to
the next higher post, i.e. Vice Principal, for which the respondents
were required to prepare a combined seniority list.
13. It was also contended that Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 deals
with seniority and provides that the seniority of persons appointed
to the post under the Rules shall be determined from the date of
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (74 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
appointment after regular selection in accordance with law.
Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the complete controversy
involved in the present batch of petitions is that the Rules of 2021,
more specifically Rule 36, do not address the issue of
determination of inter-se seniority of School Lecturers appointed
for various subjects for which the selection process was initiated
under the same advertisement. According to him, the Rules are
silent on this aspect and there is no clarity in this regard,
therefore, the petitioners have been left with no option but to
challenge the validity of Rule 36 of Rules of 2021.
14. He further submitted that first and second proviso to Rule 36
of Rules of 2021 provide that the inter se seniority of persons
appointed to a post in a particular category by direct recruitment,
on the basis of one and the same selection, shall be determined in
the order in which their names have been placed in the list
prepared under Rule 28 of Rules of 2021. He further submitted
that Rule 28 deals with recommendations made by the
Commission. By referring to Rule 28 of Rules of 2021, it was
contended that the Commission, in terms of Rule 28 is required to
prepare a list of candidates found suitable for appointment to the
posts and to arrange their names in order of merit on the basis of
marks obtained in the written examination and/or interview and to
forward the same to the Appointing Authority. He further argued
that on receiving the recommendation from the Commission, the
Appointing Authority, i.e. State, under Rule 30 of Rules of 2021,
shall select the candidates, subject to the provisions of Rules 8, 9,
10, 11, 12, strictly in accordance with the order of merit as
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (75 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
prepared under Rule 28 of Rules of 2021. Thereafter, under Rule
34 of Rules of 2021, appointments of the candidates as finally
selected are to be made strictly in the order of their merit.
15. He further submitted that the Rules of 2021 do not provide
any provision as to how the inter-se seniority of School Lecturers
appointed for different subjects shall be prepared. The word used
therein is ‘inter-se seniority’ for persons appointed to a post
under the same selection process shall be maintained in
accordance with the merit list prepared under Rule 28 of the Rules
of 2021 by the Commission. In the present case, under the
impugned advertisement, various posts of School Lecturer, in as
many as 27 subjects, were advertised vide advertisement dated
16.10.2015, wherein the last date of submission of applications,
eligibility conditions and other formalities were common, the
petitioners were eligible for appointment for the posts of
respective subjects.
16. Accordingly, the candidates belonging to different subjects
participated in one and the same selection process, wherein the
first paper, i.e. General Knowledge, was common to all while the
second paper was of their respective subjects and conducted on
different dates as they could not be conducted on the same day
due to some practical difficulty and administrative convenience.
After conducting the second paper for each subject, the
Commission declared the subject-wise result on different dates as
per its convenience because as per the advertisement, wherein
large number of posts were advertised, it appears that it was not
feasible or practically possible to declare the result of all the
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (76 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
subjects on the same date. It was pointed out that as for the
subject Hindi more than 3,000, for subject Geography more than
1100, for subject English more than 800, for subject History
approximately 2000, for subject Political Science more than 2200
vacancies were advertised and for which substantial number of
candidates appeared in the examination as conducted wherein
they appeared and, thereafter got selected by the respondents.
17. The Commission declared results for almost all the subjects,
however, results of some of the subjects was put to challenge by
certain candidates before the Hon’ble High Court, due to which
selection process was stayed by the High Court including further
proceedings pursuant to the advertisement. Learned Senior
Counsel, Mr. Bhandari, submitted that prior to such challenges
being made to the result in respect of certain subjects, the
commission had already declared the results for other subjects for
which fewer posts were advertised and the process was going on
smoothly without any legal or other hurdle. In those subjects, the
selection process was completed, recommendations were
forwarded by the Commission and the Appointing Authority
immediately issued appointment orders. This happened because
the number of posts as advertised for certain subjects were very
few in number.
18. He specifically submitted that, since the selection process for
certain subjects was put to challenge, therefore, the remaining
candidates of the other subjects were appointed as School
Lecturers without any delay and this happened due to
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (77 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
administrative and situational convenience of Respondent-
Commission and State Government.
19. It was submitted that in respect of the remaining subjects,
where selection process had been stayed by the Hon’ble High
Court, the entire process came to be stalled, however, thereafter,
as per the orders of the Hon’ble High Court, the Commission
declared the revised results on different dates and thereafter,
made recommendations to the Appointing Authority. After
conducting the counseling in remaining subjects, the appointing
authority issued appointment orders again on different dates
without any legal basis but for their convenience. He specifically
pointed out that the candidates belonging to the subjects
whose results were not put to challenge were appointed
earlier, despite having participated in the same
advertisement and the same selection process.
Consequently, due to the earlier issuance of appointment
orders, such candidates were assigned higher seniority,
whereas Rules of 2021 do not provide for the determination
of seniority in such manner. He further submitted that the
entire exercise as undertaken by the Commission and the
Appointing Authority, i.e., respondents herein, appears to
have been carried out on the basis of their convenience and
suitability. In order to show the illegal disparity created between
the petitioners and the other similarly situated candidate though
applied for different subjects but under the same selection
process, the petitioners prepared comparative details in the form
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (78 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
of Schedule A and B, which are reproduced as under (part of the
pleadings of the Writ Petition):-
Schedule -A
S Subjects Subject Result Recommen Counseling Appointm Revised Recomm Counseling Appointm
No wise Date dation Date ent order Result endation Date ent Order
Post Forwarding Date Date (As Forwardi
Date by per Order ng Date
RPSC of Hon’ble by RPSC
High
Court)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11 13 14 15
1 Political 2256 22.09.16 Recommen – – 31.05.17 05.06.17 09.06.17 09.06.17
Science dation not
sent2 English 860 04.10.16 Recommen – – 29.05.17 06.06.17 10.06.17 10.06.17
dation not
sent3 Hindi 3237 29.09.16 Recommen – – 02.06.17 13.06.17 16.06.17 16.06.17
dation not
sent4 History 1968 23.09.16 Recommen – – 05.06.17 16.06.17 22.06.17 22.06.17
dation not
sent5 Commerce 247 26.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointm 13.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17
ent order
not
issued6 Physics 822 18.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointm 12.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17
ent order
not
issued7 Biology 599 1.10.16 26.10.16 03.11.16 Appointm 13.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17
ent order
not
issued8 Home 107 19.09.16 07.11.16 – – 08.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17
Science9 Geography 1210 28.09.16 7.11.16 Counseling – 12.06.17 27.06.17 28.06.17 28.06.17
not
conducted10 Sanskrit 364 24.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling – 07.06.17 27.06.17 28.06.17 28.06.17
not
conducted11 Economics 180 30.09.16 07.10.16 Counseling – 08.06.17 29.07.17 01.07.17 01.07.17
not
conducted12 Rajasthani 8 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 – – – –
13 Philosophy 1 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 – – – –
14 Music 2 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 – – – –
15 Sindhi 6 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 – – – –
16 Sociology 11 20.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 – – – –
17 Maths 276 05.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 – – – –
18 Drawing 145 20.09.16 16.10.16 23.10.16 23.10.16 – – – –
19 Chemistry 799 17.09.16 17.10.16 23.10.16 23.10.16 – – – –
Schedule- B
S No. Subjects Subject Wise Post Result Date Recommendation Counseling Appointment
Forwarding Date order date
b RPSC
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 Rajasthani 8 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16
2 Philosophy 1 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16
3 Music 2 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16
4 Sindhi 6 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16
5 Sociology 11 20.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16
6 Maths 276 05.09.01 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (79 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
7 Drawing 145 20.09.16 16.10.16 23.10.16 23.10.16
8 Chemistry 799 17.09.16 17.10.16 26.10.16 26.10.16
9 Commerce 247 26.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointment
order not
issued
10 Physics 822 18.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointment
order not
issued
11 Biology 599 01.10.16 26.10.16 03.11.16 Appointment
order not
issued
12 Geography 1210 28.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling –
not conducted
13 Sanskrit 364 29.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling –
not conducted
14 Economics 180 30.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling –
not conducted
15 Political 2256 22.09.16 Recommendation – –
Science not sent
16 English 860 04.10.16 Recommendation - -
not sent
17 Hindi 3237 29.09.16 Recommendation - -
not sent
18 History 1968 23.09.16 Recommendation - -
not sent
19 Home Science 107 19.09.16 Recommendation - -
not sent
20. Mr. Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that on the
basis of the dates of appointment, as mentioned in the aforesaid
tables, the respondent-State prepared the seniority list dated
21.11.2022 (Annexure-9). The petitioners, being aggrieved,
submitted their representations and objections against the said
seniority list vide letter dated 26.11.2022 (Annexure-11). In the
said representation, it was specifically pointed out that a serious
anomaly has occurred in the preparation of the functional
eligibility list, as prepared for conducting the D.P.C., for the post of
Vice-Principal only on account of the delay of seven months in
issuance of revised result, recommendation, counseling and then
issuance of appointment orders to the petitioners herein.
It was further contended that such delay occurred due to the
selection process being stalled on account of the stay order of
the Hon’ble High Court in respect of certain subjects as
various acts of Commission were put to challenge, in which
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (80 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
the candidate like the petitioners were not at fault. It was
further contended that, only on account of the stay, candidates of
such subjects suffered and their appointment orders were issued
with a delay of about 7-8 months, which resulted in their
placement, lower in the seniority list, below other earlier
appointed candidates under the same selection process. It was
also pointed out that less meritorious candidates of various
subjects were assigned seniority over the top ranker and
high merit holders of different subjects and by this the
Commission allowed the less meritorious candidates to
march over the meritorious candidates. By allowing such a
serious illegality in the merit list of selected candidates
under the same selection process, the merit was seriously
sacrificed.
21. He further submitted that the Rules of 2021 do not provide
for preparation of the seniority list in the manner as adopted by
the respondents and therefore, the entire action is illegal,
arbitrary and unjustified. He further pointed out that there is no
provision under the Rules of 2021 which prescribes the manner or
method for preparation of seniority in such circumstances,
particularly with regard to inter-se seniority of the Lecturers
appointed through the same selection process for different
subjects. He further submitted that after the advertisement of the
year 2015, the respondent issued another advertisement dated
13.04.2018, bearing advertisement No. 10/2018-19 whereby
posts of School Lecturer in as many as 20 subjects were again
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (81 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
advertised, which included a majority of the subjects covered
under the earlier advertisement of 2015.
22. In the advertisement of the year 2018, it was specifically
pointed out by learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Bhandari, that the results
were declared on the same date and thereafter, counseling was
conducted as scheduled by the Commission through its Press Note
dated 24.08.2020. Although counseling and document
verification were held on various dates but the
appointment orders for all subjects were issued on a single
date i.e., 18.03.2021. He further submitted that in respect
of the advertisement of 2018, no such anomaly occurred
and the inter se seniority of candidates across all subjects
was determined on the basis of the merit secured by them
in their respective subjects.
23. He further contended that (under the advertisement of
2018), the candidates securing first position in merit in
each subject were placed in the highest rank, followed by
candidates securing second, third and fourth positions in
their respective subjects. This ensured proper weightage,
consideration and value to meritorious candidates of each
subject by placing them at an appropriate position strictly
in accordance with their respective merit, while issuing
appointment orders on the same date and accordingly,
assigned them proper place in the seniority list.
24. In view of the above, Mr. Bhandari submitted that by
following the process as was followed in Advertisement of 2018,
also under the scheme of the Rules of 2021, a combined inter se
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (82 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
merit list ought to have been prepared for all subjects, including
all the candidates selected during the selection process under the
advertisement of 2015, as impugned in the present batch of writ
petitions.
25. However, in the case of the present petitioners, a different
yardstick was adopted, resulting in unwarranted complications.
Consequently, top rank holders and meritorious candidates across
various subjects have been placed much lower in the seniority list,
which has seriously affected their right to be considered for
promotion to the post of Vice-Principal and thereafter, to the post
of Principal. Such action on the part of respondent Commission
and the State Appointing Authority herein, is seriously illegal,
arbitrary and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the
present case and prayed for quashing of the same.
26. Mr. Bhandari, relied upon various judgments to support his
arguments which are as under:
(1) Ajay Kumar Shukla v. Arvind Rai and
Ors.; (2022) 12 SCC 579.
WP No. 53123/2012
(3) Ajeet Singh v. State of Punjab; (1999) 7
SCC 209
(4) H.M. Singh v. Union of India; (2014) 3
SCC 670
(5) Sudhir Kumar Atrey v. Union of India &
Ors.; (2022) 1 SCC 352
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (83 of 104) [CW-1408/2023](6) C. Jayachandran and Ors. v. State of
Kerala and Ors.; 2020 SCC Online SC
281(Supreme Court)
(7) Sudharshan Mundra v. Goverdhan
Kumar & State of Rajasthan; D.B. SAW
516/2025 (RHC)
(8) Ravi Juneja and Ors. v. HPGCL; LPA No.
1208 of 2012 (O&M) (P&H HC)
27. Per Contra, learned AAG, vehemently opposed the writ
petitions and submitted that the challenge to the proviso to Rule
36 of the Rules of 2021 is misconceived and thereby deserves to
be dismissed.
28. Learned AAG further submitted that law in relation to
promotion is well settled as it is not a vested right and
consideration has to be given as per the rules applicable at the
time of such consideration. In case of petitioners herein, earlier
Rules of 1970, Rules of 1971 and thereafter, Rules of 2021 have
already made the provisions of promotion, explicitly clear and
unambiguous.
29. Learned AAG contended that the Rules of 2021 came into
force upon publication in the Official Gazette and thus, govern all
the matters relating to seniority and promotion thereafter.
Promotion is not a vested right and the settled position of law is
that consideration for promotion must be made in accordance with
the rules prevailing on the date of consideration. He further
contended that the principle governing determination of seniority
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (84 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
under the Rules of 2021 is substantially same as was provided
under the Rules of 1970.
30. It was also argued that merely because the advertisement
for School Lecturer posts for all the subjects was advertised
together, the same does not itself make the post/cadre common.
The eligibility criteria, number of posts, selection process, etc. for
all the posts of School Lecturer for various subjects was separate
and distinct and thus, no common seniority list, as desired by
petitioners, could have been prepared by the respondents by
applying inter se seniority of persons appointed due to common
advertisement issued for selection on concerned post for various
subjects.
31. It was further contended that law regarding the presumption
of constitutionality of the Rules of 2021 is well settled and thus, it
was upon the petitioners to demonstrate that the impugned Rule
is invalid or irrational, which they have failed to demostrate by
pleadings and arguments before this Court. In the case at hand,
the proviso (1) to Rule 36 of Rules of 2021 carves out an
exception to the rule pertaining to consideration of date of
appointment as the basis for determination of seniority for
incumbents selected in the same selection process.
32. Learned counsel also raised an objection regarding
maintainability of the writ petition. It was submitted that the writ
petitions suffer from the vice of non-joinder of a necessary party,
as the Department of Personnel, which notified that the Rules of
2021 has not been impleaded despite the challenge being made
against the validity of the Rules. It was further argued that the
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (85 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
petitions raise undisputed questions of fact, therefore, he seriously
questioned the entertainability of the present petitions.
33. He further pointed out that although recruitment to various
posts of Lecturer was initiated through a common advertisement,
yet each subject constituted a separate and independent
recruitment process. While the General Knowledge paper was
common for each subject, however, each subject had a separate
subject paper, eligibility criteria, vacancies, merit lists, separate
declarations of results, recommendations by the Commission and
appointment orders. Consequently, appointments to different
subjects Lecturer cannot be regarded as appointments arising out
of the “same selection” only on the ground that they originated
from a common advertisement.
34. Learned AAG also submitted that the petitioners have
adopted mutually inconsistent stands. On one hand they
challenged the constitutional validity of the Rules of 2021, while
on the other, they contended that the seniority list has been
prepared contrary to the very Rules that are under challenge. If
the grievance is only against the preparation of the seniority list,
then the appropriate remedy lies in challenging the seniority list
and not the validity of the Rules.
35. Learned AAG further referred to Rule 28 of the Rules of 1970
and Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021, and argued that seniority is
always determined on the basis of the date of appointment after
regular selection in service. He relied upon the notification dated
10.10.2002 issued by the Department of Personnel, whereby
several service rules, including the Rules of 1970, were amended
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (86 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
to expressly provide that seniority shall be determined from the
date of appointment after regular selection in service.
36. Learned AAG further contended that the recruitment agency,
i.e. the Commission, merely conducts examinations, prepares
subject-wise merit lists and forwards recommendations, whereas
the Appointing Authority completes the statutory formalities
before issuing appointment orders. Since the Rules prescribe the
date of appointment as the governing factor for determining
seniority, therefore, they were justified in assigning seniority on
the basis of appointment date and in the present case, there is
neither any illegality in the entire exercise nor any violation of the
Rules of 1970 then now Rules of 2021.
37. Learned AAG further explained to this Court that the
respondents have followed a consistent method in preparing the
combined seniority list. The seniority year for each subject has
been determined with reference to the date on which the first
appointment order for that subject was issued. Accordingly, where
the first appointment in a subject was made between 1 April 2016
and 31 March 2017, the seniority year was assigned as 2016-17;
whereas in the case, where the first appointment was made
between 1 April 2017 and 31 March 2018, the seniority year was
assigned as 2017-18. It was pointed out that the first appointment
order for School Lecturer (Physics) was issued on 24.06.2017 and,
therefore, all candidates appointed against that post of school
Lecturer (Physics) were correctly assigned seniority from the year
2017-18.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (87 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
38. It was further argued that the merit assigned by the
Commission has not been disturbed in any manner. Within each
subject, seniority strictly follows the merit list as prepared
by the Commission. Where the first appointment orders for
two or more subjects are issued on the same date, the inter
se seniority of candidates holding the same merit position
in their respective subject-wise merit lists is determined on
the basis of age/date of birth, which is a well-recognised
principle.
39. Learned AAG laid emphasis to the relevant rules and stated
that the proviso 1 to Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 applies only to
appointments arising out of the same selection for the same post.
Since School Lecturer posts in different subjects are distinct,
having separate examinations, separate merit lists and separate
recommendations, appointments to different subjects cannot be
treated as emanating from the same selection. Consequently,
the petitioners’ interpretation of the proviso is contrary to
the scheme of the Rules.
40. It was also submitted that the petitioners, having
participated in the recruitment process with full knowledge of the
applicable Rules and having accepted appointments thereunder,
are now estopped from challenging the statutory mechanism
governing seniority merely because a combined seniority list as
prepared for promotion to the post of Vice Principal is adversely
affecting their promotional rights.
41. Lastly, it was contended by learned AAG that Rule 36 of the
Rules of 2021 itself has not been challenged by the petitioners.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (88 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
The challenge is confined only to Proviso (1) thereof,
whereas the substantive rule itself mandates determination
of seniority on the basis of the date of appointment. The
proviso merely supplements the main provision and cannot be
read in isolation. Since the principal provision remains
unchallenged, the challenge to the proviso alone is misconceived.
42. Learned AAG relied upon the following judgments to support
his arguments, which are as follows:
1. PU Joshi and Ors. v. Accountant General,
Ahemdabad and Ors; (2003) 2 SCC 632
2. K Meghachandra Singh and Ors v. Ningam
Siro and Ors; (2020) 5 SCC 689
3. State of Uttaranchal & Ors. v. Dinesh
Kumar Sharma; (2007) 1 SCC 683
4. Allahabad University & Ors. v. Geetanjali
Tiwari (Pandey) & Ors.; (2024) 20 SCC 23
5. Direct Recruitment Class II Engineering
Officers’ Association v. State of Maharashtra
& Ors.; (1990) 2 SCC 715
6. Pawan Pratap Singh & Ors. v. Reevan
Singh & Ors.; (2011) 3 SCC 267
7. Ganga Vishan Gujrati & Ors. v. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.; (2019) 16 SCC 28
43. Mr. R.N. Mathur, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
private respondents strongly opposed the submissions as made by
counsel for the petitioners, justified the impugned seniority list
and action of the respondent of treating the assignment of
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (89 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
assigning the seniority on the basis of date-wise declaration and
consequent issuance of appointment orders on the post of
respective subject-wise School Lecturers. According to learned
Senior Counsel, School Lecturer of different subject forms a
separate cadre and, therefore, subject-wise results as declared
earlier shall make the candidates stand higher in merit and
consequent seniority and, accordingly, it was rightly followed by
the respondent-State while issuing the combined seniority list. He
further referred to various provisions of the Rules of 2021 and
submitted that the Rules were rightly followed in the entire
exercise and now, after so many years, the persons who were
assigned respective seniority, higher in order, cannot be disturbed.
In the concluding submissions, all the respondents counsel,
prayed that the writ petitions being devoid of merits deserve to be
dismissed.
44. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the
material on record.
45. In this batch of writ petitions and also connected
special appeals, the grievances of the petitioners are that
despite participating in the same selection process initiated under
the same advertisement dated 16.10.2015 issued by the
Commission, by which various subject-wise posts of School
Lecturer were advertised, they were not assigned correct year of
selection and correct inter se seniority. School Lecturers are
appointed for teaching to the students of class 11th and 12th. The
services of lectures were earlier governed by Rules of 1970, when
the advertisement was issued in the year 2015. The petitioners
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (90 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
herein participated in the selection process and appeared in the
common General Knowledge and General Studies paper which was
conducted on a common day and on different dates for the said
respective subject paper. With the conduct of subject-wise
examination by the Commission, one part of the process was
completed by commission.
Thereafter, the Commission declared the subject-wise
result on different dates. Though there was no specific
condition in advertisement to declare the result of any
subject in any sequence by giving preference to one over to
other, however, it appears to this Court and also argued by
counsel for petitioners that the commission declared the
result as per its convenience and without any valid
justification and any legal foundation.
46. This Court, after considering the relevant provision, which
provides for preparation of seniority list, of the Rules of 1970-71
and subsequent to their repeal, Rules of 2021, noted that in the
present case, the seniority list was prepared, considering different
dates of declaration of result, consequent recommendations as
made by the Commission, pursuant to which the appointment
orders were issued by Appointing Authority in the order as it was
received. However, a perusal of the Rules of 2021 reveals that
they maintain a complete silence in regard to the preparation of a
common inter se seniority list for the entire cadre of School
Lecturers across all the subjects which, according to the
petitioners’ is to be considered as one cadre in respect of
determining inter se seniority among School Lecturers
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (91 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
appointed for different subjects, under the same advertisement
which is a same selection process as per the Rules.
47. However, it has been noted that the Commission as per its
convenience, declared the subject wise results on different dates
and after preparing the merit lists, made recommendations to the
Appointing Authority for the same. The Appointing Authority
thereafter issued subject-wise appointment orders on different
dates accordingly. This sequence was then taken as the basis to
determine the inter se seniority among School Lecturers of
different subjects under the impugned Rule 36.
As pointed out and also noted by this Court, results for
certain subjects was declared on the dates as mentioned in
schedule A and B, and accordingly, the recommendations were
made, appointment orders were issued and candidates joined their
service. For certain subjects, the selection process was put to
challenge by certain candidates for various reasons and, therefore,
in case of those subjects, some candidates were appointed while
others were made to wait due to the stay on the selection process.
Even in some subjects, no person could be appointed after the
stay, as the complete process was put on hold for those subjects.
Later on, after decision of those writ petitions, the selection
process for the remaining subjects was re-started,
recommendations issued, counseling conducted and lastly, the
appointment orders were issued again in a sequence as per
administrative convenience of State.
48. Admittedly, it is not in dispute, that all the candidates
participated under the same advertisement dated 16.10.2015,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (92 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
however, the results were declared on different dates for reasons
which not attributed to the petitioners. It is in sequence of date of
declaration of results candidates were issued the appointment
orders. The petitioners herein faced the difficulty when the
respondents issued seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure 9),
by which they were assigned different selection years and
erroneously very low seniority, despite participating in the same
selection process initiated under the same advertisement. It was
informed to this Court and also noted despite the fact that
advertisement was one and the same, however candidates of
around 7 subjects were assigned seniority of 2016-17 and for 17
subjects, seniority of 2017-18 was assigned. The Rules of 2021
nowhere provides for assignment of year of selection in such
manner. If such kind of practice is allowed to be continued, then in
cases where the selection process remains stalled for years due to
judicial scrutiny and candidates are appointed in parts then
permitting assignment of seniority in same sequence would lead to
assignment of different selection year and would result in grave
and serious anomalies.
It is for this reason, when faced with serious difficulties,
petitioners submitted their objections, but same were not
considered and decided objectively by the concerned authorities.
Therefore, they filed the instant petitions by which challenge has
been made to the proviso 1 to impugned Rule 36 of Rules of 2021,
as seniority has been prepared in terms of said impugned Rules.
As the grievance of the petitioners is in regard to the
impugned inter-se seniority, and on that basis consequential
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (93 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
denial of promotion for the post of Vice Principal and therefore,
the provisions of the governing rules needs to be examined
49. A perusal of the Rules of 1970 and Rules of 1971 and after
their repeal, Rules of 2021, shows that the merit list is prepared
by Commission for each subject strictly on the basis of merit.
There is nothing in the rules, nor there are any notifications,
circulars, instructions, etc. issued by the Department of Personnel
or by the Commission, which permit them to prepare the merit list
in such sequence by giving priority to any specific subject and
thereafter, making recommendation in that sequence. The
selection process in question before this Court pertains to the year
2015-16. It is a settled law that in any selection process, merit
cannot be sacrificed at any cost, therefore, all selections must be
made strictly in accordance with merit.
50. The impugned rules as challenged, at the cost of repetition,
is reproduced as under:-
36. Seniority.- Seniority of persons appointed to the post
encadred in the service shall be determined from the date
of appointment on the post after regular selection in
accordance with the provisions of these rules. Appointment
on ad hoc or urgent temporary basis shall not be deemed
to be appointment after regular selection:
Provided that,
(1) the inter-se seniority of persons appointed to a post in
a particular category by direct recruitment on the basis of
one and the same selection, except those who do not join
Service when a post is offered to them within a period of
six weeks from the date of issue of order or longer, if
extended by the Appointing Authority, shall follow the
order in which their names have been placed in the list
prepared under rule 28.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (94 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
(2) if two or more persons are appointed to the service
during the same year, a person appointed by promotion
shall rank senior to a person appointed by direct
recruitment.
(3) the persons selected and appointed as a result of a
selection, which is not subject to review and revision, shall
rank senior to the persons who are selected and appointed
as a result of subsequent selection.
(4) the seniority inter-se of persons selected on the basis
of seniority cum merit and on the basis of merit in the
same selection shall be the same as in the next lower
grade.
(5) the seniority inter-se of the persons adjudged suitable
under sub-rule (3) of rule 6 shall be determined according
to their length of continuous service and they shall en-bloc
rank junior to all the persons appointed regularly by direct
recruitment or by promotion upto the date of the
commencement of these rules.
(6) interlacing of seniorities maintained by different
ranges/divisions/appointing authorities on a post, for the
purpose of promotion to the next higher post in the
regular line of promotion, shall be made on the basis of
dates of joining by the candidates to the post irrespective
of placement in the seniority list maintained by the range/
division/ appointing authority concerned.
51. The impugned Rule 36 provides that the seniority of persons
appointed shall be determined on the basis of date of appointment
under the Rules. Proviso (1) to 36 provides for preparation and
assignment of inter-se seniority to the candidates, who
participated in selection process which is one and common for all,
by placing their names in terms of the merit list prepared under
Rule 28. Rule 28 provides for recommendation of the Commission/
Board/Committee/Appointing Authority. As the Commission is the
recruiting authority, therefore, the Commission has to prepare list
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (95 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
of eligible and suitable candidates and to arrange them in the
order of marks as secured by them. On preparation of this list, the
Commission recommends names to the Appointing Authority,
which under Rule 30, following Rules 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, appoint the
candidates strictly as per merit.
The grievance here is in respect of inter-se seniority as
prepared by the respondents, as it is adversely affecting the
promotional rights of the petitioners. Rule 36 is the only relevant
for determination of inter-se seniority. On perusal of Rule 36, this
Court noted that there shall be one inter-se seniority of all
selected candidates appointed under the one and same selection
process. The term one and the same selection process came
to be examined in catena of cited judgments where it was
held that the selection process initiated under a common
advertisement shall be treated as one selection process. In
terms of the settled law, as cited, it is not in dispute that all
petitioners participated in common and same selection
process and therefore cannot given differential treatment.
52. This Court, as referred and placed on record by petitioners,
considered the stand of State Government from the reply as filed
in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12746/2025 titled as ‘Nitesh
Kumar & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan’, and noted that
similar issues cropped up in the past also, therefore, the
Department of Personnel issued directions to the Commission to
declare the complete results of all subjects in one go, so that it
may undertake document verification in accordance with the
directions of the DoP, ensuring that appointment/ posting
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (96 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
orders are issued on the same day and all anomalies are
removed. The relevant para of the reply as filed in the case of
Nitesh Kumar (supra) reads as under:-
“20. That the averments made in para no.20 of
the writ petition are not disputed insofar as they
are in conformity with the orders passed by the
Hon’ble Division Bench vide Annex.P/8 attached
to the writ petition. Remaining assertions made
by the petitioners in this para are emphatically
denied the made by the petitioners in this para
are emphatically denied the manner in which
they have been asserted. In this regard,
answering respondents respectfully refer to
Para-6 and 7 of the order dated 10.2.2025
passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench, which are
usefully extracted as follows:
“6. Learned AAG is directed to take final instructions
regarding the inter se seniority of the Lecturers and
address this Court on the next date.
7. Thus, while keeping the issue open to be
addressed on the next date i.e. 15.04.2025, it is
directed that the State shall complete the exercise of
conducting the review DPC/ DPC for the posts of
Vice Principals and Principals and also complete the
task of posting after proper counseling. This exercise
shall be completed for all the posts that are vacant
on this date, for which the review DPC/DPC is due. It
is made clear that such promotion/posting shall
remain subject to the final outcome of these
petitions. This order shall supersede all orders
previously passed in this matter by this Court as well
as Hon’ble Single Bench in the ongoing litigation
before this Court today.”
In pursuance of the order dated 10.2.2025, State
Government provided guidelines dated 24.2.2025 to
proceed with seniority list and DPC of the Vice Principal
cadre as per Hon’ble Court’s direction. For the future,
RPSC has been Hon’ble Court’s direction. For the
future, RPSC has been one go, given the fact that
document verification is to be carried out by the
department now as per DOP’s direction. Similarly, it
has been directed to issue posting orders on the same
day after DV and counseling.
In pursuance of the orders referred above, Department
conducted counseling of candidates selected for
promotion to the post of Vice Principal against the
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (97 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
vacancies of the year 2022-23 and provided them
posting, as also, initiated process for conducting DPC
for the vacancy years 2023-24 and 2024-25. Also, vide
order dated 9.7.2025, RPSC has been requested to
provide its recommendation for appointment of
candidates on the post of School Lecturer (various
subjects) for ongoing orders on the same day after DV
and counseling. In this regard, recruitment agency will
send credential of the meritorious candidates to the
Department; department will conduct documents
verification and will forward its report to the
recruitment agency and then only, final merit list will
be issued by the recruitment agency. In this way,
posting orders will-also be issued in future in one go.”
53. The above quoted stand of the State Government is based on
the reason that merit should not be sacrificed. Considering the
above admitted stand of the State, circumstances, in the present
case, act of the Commission of declaring results, making
recommendations in such a sequential manner and the further act
of the appointing authority of issuing the appointment order in
such sequence is neither fair, legal nor justified and contrary to
their stand. Therefore, as noted, the State Government through
the Department of Personnel, has itself issued instructions to the
Commission to declare the results in one go, so that appointments
may also be made by the State Government on the same date
ensuring that the inter-se seniority list is strictly determined on
the basis of merit alone.
54 This Court noted that in the advertisement of the year 2018
also results were declared on different dates between June 2020
to August 2020 and thereafter, recommendation were sent on
different dates. However, the appointing authority issued the
appointment order on common date, following the Rules of
2021, as all candidates participated for School Lecturer in
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (98 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
one and same advertisement which is nothing but the same
selection process. The common inter-se seniority was prepared
strictly as per merit by placing the top rank holders of each
subject on the top and thereafter 2nd, 3rd, 4th and
respective rank holders of different subjects were placed in
that sequence while preparing the inter-se seniority strictly
as per merit.
55. The complete challenge as made before this Court by
the petitioners herein could have been avoided by the State
by following the same process as they followed in
advertisement of 2018. Admittedly, in both the cases,
common advertisement for the same post having different
subject wise vacancies advertised and having all other
commonalities, but just because results in some subjects
under the advertisement of the year 2015 could not be
declared due to stay by Hon’ble High Court, the procedure
foreign to the rules and also to their own stand was
adopted. During the course of argument, counsel for the state
failed to justify as to why the different different
method/process/scheme were adopted by them when both the
selection process were governed by the Rules of 2021. Once the
respondents themselves, by following the mandate of Rule 36,
prepared the inter-se-seniority in 2018 advertisement, as per
merit of all the candidates, who participated under the same
advertisement, then there action, is perverse, illegal and
arbitrary, of assigning different selection years and consequential
erroneous seniority is in disregard of the fact that the petitioners
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (99 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
herein, though belong to different subject but participated under
the same advertisement of the year 2015, similar to the
advertisement of the year 2018.
56. Further, the action of respondent-State of assigning different
selection year to the candidate of same advertisement due to
judicial scrutiny of the selection process, most specifically 2017-18
(instead of 2016-17) is highly, unjustified, arbitrary, and illegal on
the face of record. It is on the basis of above, a huge disparity and
serious complications have been created for the candidates who
had participated in the same selection process.
57. After perusal of the impugned proviso 1 to Rule 36 and other
relevant Rules, as referred vis-a-vis exercise undertaken by
respondents under the advertisement of 2018, this Court is of the
view that the impugned rule is constitutionally valid and this Court
find no reason to declare them unconstitutional. The complete
impugned exercise as done by the respondent-State is without any
basis, justification and without any support of the then Rules of
1970 or the new rules, i.e., of 2021. Therefore the complete act of
assigning different years of selection for all the candidates who
participated under the same advertisement, is also erroneous and
per se illegal.
Mr. Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel, also pointed out that
even while preparing the seniority for year 2017-18 to the
candidates of the selection process of the year 2015, grave
illegalities were committed in again in assigning the inter se
seniority as again respondents acted as per their administrative
convenience without any legal basis.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (100 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
On perusal of the scheme of Rules this Court is of the opinion
that administrative convenience of the Commission and
respondent-State cannot be permitted to frustrate the
principle of merit and inter se seniority in the complete
selection process. The impugned exercise undertaken by
the respondent-State in preparation of the merit list has
resulted in a situation where less meritorious candidates of
one subject have been placed above candidates of other
subjects who are demonstrably more meritorious, including
those securing top and higher ranks in the overall merit.
58. This Court noted that under the Rules of 2021, there is no
priority accorded to any specific subject for the purpose of making
promotion to the post of Vice Principal. However, the manner in
which the seniority list was prepared, resulted in School Lecturers
of certain subjects being treated as senior and are being declared
as more meritorious which is in disregard of their actual merit
performance in the recruitment process. The law relating to equal
and fair opportunity for promotion is well settled.
59. This settled principle of equal and fair opportunity has been
dealt by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar
Shukla (supra) where the Hon’ble Supreme Court by relying
upon earlier precedents, on which the counsel for petitioners have
also relied in the present petition, held that right to promotion is
not a fundamental right but fair consideration of promotion has
evolved as a fundamental right. The Court observed that Articles
14 and 16(1) of the Constitution, as they are closely connected to
each other, establish that while there is no absolute right to be
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (101 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
promoted, every eligible employee possesses a fundamental right
to be considered for promotion following the principle of equality
and fair opportunity. Article 16(1) ensures that if an individual
meets the eligibility criteria, denying him a fair spot in the
selection process constitutes a constitutional infraction. Thus,
equal opportunity and the resulting inter-se seniority are
protected facets of a citizen’s personal employment rights under
the law.
60. It is also a settled law that candidates higher in merit cannot
be denied seniority or penalized because of litigation delays that
had no relation to their eligibility for consideration of the said post.
If the principle of equal and fair opportunity is not applied in
determination of inter-se seniority and promotions, then it would
negate the mandate of both Rules of 1971 as well as 2021.
61. In the present case, once the respondents by following the
Rules of 2021, have prepared the inter se seniority correctly for
the selection under the advertisement of the year 2018 then they
are legally duty bound to apply the same principle to the
selections in the year 2015 as well. Thus, the act of the
respondent-Commission and the respondent Appointing Authority
as noted in the above para of the detailed discussion, is found to
be unjustified and arbitrary per se.
After considering the judgments as cited, the stand of the
State Government from the reply as filed in the case of Nitesh
Kumar (supra) and the practice as adopted by them for the
selection process of the year 2018 and also the instructions,
guidelines, etc. as issued by Department of Personnel,
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (102 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
Government of Rajasthan from time to time, whereby the Public
Service Commission and the respective Department have been
directed to issue the select list in one go so as to avoid any kind of
unnecessary complexities in any selection process when the
advertisement and the conditions of participation are one and
same, the impugned seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure-9)
is declared illegal and therefore, same is quashed and set aside.
The promotion as made to the post of Vice-Principal during the
pendency of these writ petitions, on quashing of the above
impugned seniority list are also declared illegal and are hereby
quashed and set aside. The respondent- Appointing Authority is
directed to assign same selection year to all the candidates who
participated, selected and appointed under the advertisement of
the year 2015, while following the same exercise as they followed
for the advertisement of 2018 in assigning the same year of
selection. Thereafter, prepare the inter-se seniority list of the
candidates who were appointed under the advertisement of 2015,
strictly as per the procedure as followed in 2018, and thereafter,
make the promotion to the post of Vice principal and other higher
post strictly following the Rules of 2021.
It is expected that the respondent Appointing Authority shall
issue necessary notification, circular, order etc., if required, to
remove any anomaly, if remains, in respect of the controversy as
raised before this Court, after the order of this Court, so as to
avoid further litigation and complexity.
62. The above exercise regarding preparation of the correct
inter-se seniority shall be carried out within a period of four
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (103 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
months from the date of passing of this order without any further
delay.
63. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed.
64. There shall be no order as to cost(s).
65. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.119/2025
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19366/2024:-
66. The instant special appeal has been filed by the appellants
challenging the final order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the
learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19366/2024
titled as Madan Mohan Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &
others.
67. By the order impugned the learned Single Judge disposed of
the writ petition in view of the additional affidavit as filed and the
statement made by State Counsel regarding pendency of D.B. Civil
Writ Petition No.1408/2023. As this Court has decided the D.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.1408/2023 and other connected petitions, in
view of the same, the present special appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 17.12.2024 is quashed and set aside. The
matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge to decide
afresh in terms of the order as passed in this bunch of writ
petitions.
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.461/2023
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7643/2022:-
State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Ajay Kumar Rohila & Ors.
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (104 of 104) [CW-1408/2023]
68. The instant special appeal is directed against the order dated
05.05.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.7643/2022 titled as Ajay Kumar Rohila & Ors. Vs.
State of Rajasthan and others. In the said writ petition, by the
order impugned dated 05.05.2023 the learned Single Judge
noticing the order passed by the Division Bench in connected D.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.895/2023 titled as Pradeep Kumar Khangwal
Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, restrained the respondents
from granting posting on the post of Vice Principal in terms of the
promotional exercise as carried out.
69. As the controversy involved in the D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.895/2023 and connected writ petitions have been decided by
the order as passed in the batch of writ petitions, in view of the
same, this special appeal as directed against the order dated
05.05.2023 is disposed of. The appellant State/respondent-
petitioners may file appropriate application in the pending writ
petition before learned Single Judge to decide the same in terms
of order of this Court.
70. Copy of the present order be separately placed in each
connected file.
71. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(RAVI CHIRANIA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J
RAHUL KUMAR
(Uploaded on 10/07/2026 at 05:52:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/07/2026 at 07:13:57 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
