[2025:RJ-JP:11779] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3722/2025 Dr. Meena Vijay W/o Shri Rajeev Vijay, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Plot No. 5, Prajapat Nagar, New Sanganer Road, Behind Patel Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, College Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. The Commissioner, College Education, Block-4, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur. 3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. The Joint Director (Hrd), College Education, Block-4, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur. 5. The Principal, Govt. College, Dudu, District Ajmer (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raj Kumar Goyal For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 17/03/2025 1. Instant petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- “1. It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may very graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and action of the non petitioners by which they are not allowing the petitioner to continue her services for the post of the college assistant lecturer under vidya sambal yojana in [2025:RJ-JP:11779] (2 of 4) [CW-3722/2025] respective subject may kindly be held illegal and arbitrary. 2. By appropriate writ of directions the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to continue her services for the post of the college assistant lecturer under the vidya sambal yojana in respective subject for the next academic session 2025-26/next academic sessions/semesters and also directed to respondents not to terminate services of the petitioner till availability of vacant post in any Govt. College in the State of Rajasthan in subject of the petitioner. 3. Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.” 2. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made to continue the petitioners as College Lecturer under the Vidhya Sambal Yojna and not to replace them from another set of contractual employees in pursuance of the advertisement dated 21.01.2025. 3. During the course of arguments, it is apprised to this Court that the similar controversy involved in this petition, came before this Court in the case of “Ram Chaturvedi & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.” (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1474/2023) and the said controversy has been set at rest with the following directions:- “(i) Respondents while engaging the Guest Faculty in the session 2023-24 in various colleges/universities under the Raj-CES under Vidya Sambal Scheme, shall give preference to engage the petitioners who [2025:RJ-JP:11779] (3 of 4) [CW-3722/2025] have already rendered services as Guest Faculty in this scheme in the previous sessions/years, at previous place of posting or nearby place obviously subject to availability of vacancies in the previous college/university or nearby place as well as after considering the satisfactory services of petitioners. (ii) Petitioners who have been engaged as Guest Faculty in the previous sessions shall not be dislodged/replaced from its previous place with fresh appointment of Guest Faculty, subject to availability of vacant post and need of engagement. (iii) After re-engagement/adjustment of the petitioners i.e. previous Guest Faculty in the Vidya Sambal Scheme, against vacancies for the year 2023-24, the remaining vacant posts of previous years, and on the new vacancies accrued in session 2023-24 may be filled by the fresh aspirants in accordance with the criteria of selection prescribed in the scheme. (iv) It is made clear that petitioners who were already engaged in the previous sessions and are willing for appointment/engagement in the present session 2023-24 in the Vidya Sambal Scheme, are required to apply afresh pursuant to advertisement issued by respondents and his/her re-engagement in the Vidya Sambal Scheme for session 2023-24 would be governed by terms and conditions of the scheme and shall not create any additional equity/claim which is not available in the scheme.” 4. In the aforesaid case of Ram Chaturvedi (supra), the Coordinate Bench of this Court has issued directions to the respondents to give preference to engage the co-petitioners, who have already rendered services as Guest Faculty in this scheme in the previous sessions/years. [2025:RJ-JP:11779] (4 of 4) [CW-3722/2025] 5. Since the controversy involved in this petition has already been set at rest in the case of Ram Chaturvedi (supra), this Court finds no valid reason to take a different view. 6. In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of with expectation from the respondents to consider the case of petitioner in pursuance of the advertisement dated 21.01.2025, only in case, if the petitioner has worked with the respondents in the last preceding Sessions. 7. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/17