[2025:RJ-JP:31273] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18531/2013 Rajkumar Kalyani S/o Late Shri Chuuni Lal, R/o V.P. Guhala, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Khetari Vikas Samiti, Khetari, through its Secretary, Head Officer: 4 KA 24, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur, Raj. 3. The Commissioner, College Education, Shikshya Sankul, JLN Marg Jaipur, Raj. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18602/2013 Irfanuddin S/o Janab Mohd. Husain, R/o H.1/14 Vikram Nagar, Rawatbhata, Dist. Chittorgarh, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Khetari Vikas Samiti, Khetari, through its Secretary, Head Officer: 4 KA 24, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur, Raj. 3. The Commissioner, College Education, Shikshya Sankul, JLN Marg Jaipur, Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Singh For Respondent(s) : None present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 12/08/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:31273] (2 of 4) [CW-18531/2013] 1. Both the writ petitions have common facts and question of law involved hence, these petitions were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment. 2. In both the writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for direction against respondent No.2 to send the service record of the petitioners to the State Government and to direct State Government to absorb the petitioners in Government service. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners have submitted that they were working with Vinodini PG College, Khetari, Dist. Jhunjunu, Rajasthan which is being managed by the Managing Committee of Khetari Vikas Samiti. As per the petitioners, the aforesaid institute is an ‘aided institution’. The State Government enacted the "Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Service Rules, 2010" in order to give an option to the employees working in ‘aided institution’ for seeking appointment in the Government institutions. Process of appointment has also been given in the aforesaid Rules of 2010. Grievance of the petitioners is that under the aforesaid Rules although, they have submitted application before the Managing Committee to forward their names for consideration for appointment in Government institutions as per Rules of 2010, yet the respondent No.2 has failed to forward their application form alongwith record to the State Government, which has deprived the petitioners of their right of legitimate consideration and appointment under the Rules of 2010. 4. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that the writ petitions filed by the petitioners are totally misconceived and rather based upon misleading facts. It [2025:RJ-JP:31273] (3 of 4) [CW-18531/2013] has been submitted that the aforesaid Rules of 2010 have come into force w.e.f. 01.02.2011 and such Rules were applicable only on 'existing employees' defined under the Rules who were holding the aided post. In the instant case, both the petitioners were not working on the date of enforcement of Rules of 2010. Hence, the Rules of 2010 are not applicable. The State Government sought information from respondent No.2 with regard to the petitioners and by sending one letter dated 16.11.2011, the entire details were submitted by respondent No.2 before the State Government. Since, the petitioners were not even eligible for consideration on account of not being existing employees on the date of enforcement of the Rules, no relief as prayed can be granted to the petitioners. Hence, prayer has been made to dismiss the writ petition filed by the petitioner. 5. I have considered the submissions made at Bar and examined the record. 6. It would be relevant to refer the provisions of Rules of 2010 which are as under:- Rule 2(g). "employee" means an employee in a recognized non-government aided educational institution and who is working against aided and sanctioned post; Rule 4. Procedure of appointment in Government service. (1). Such regularly appointed employees in the No.- Government Aided Educational Institutions who are working against sanctioned and aided post on the date of commencement of these rules and who desire to be appointed under the Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Service Rules, 2010, in accordance with the terms and conditions mentioned in these rules, shall submit within 15 days from the date of publication of these rules in the official gazette and form-I, to the secretary of the concerned institution mentioning therein his/her service particulars with [2025:RJ-JP:31273] (4 of 4) [CW-18531/2013] an advance copy to the concerned appointing authority. (2). The secretary of the institution shall, after verifying the service particulars, forward the applications to the concerned appointing authority along with complete service record of the employee within 10 days from the last date of receipt of application. The secretary of the institution shall append a certificate to the effect that the service particulars mentioned by the employees are correct. 7. It is also relevant to refer that the aforesaid Rules of 2010 have been brought in force vide notification dated 29.11.2010 published in official gazette dated 01.12.2010. Bare perusal of definition of the employee as contemplated under the Rules of 2010 to make it clear that term 'Employee' means an 'existing employee' working in 'recognized aided institutions' on the date of enforcement of the Rules who shall be considered for appointment under the Rules. In the instant case, it would reveal by the reply to the writ petition as well as documents enclosed with the reply that on the date of enforcement of the Rules, the petitioners were not working with the respondent No.2. No rejoinder to reply has been filed by the petitioner to controvert such factual position. 8. In the light of foregoing discussion, I do not find any ground to interfere in this writ petition filed by the petitioner, hence the same is hereby dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J Neeru/43-45