[2025:RJ-JP:17900] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5896/2017 Mohd. Sadik S/o Shri Mohd. Shakil, Nagori Mohalla, Babaji Ki Chawani, Dausa. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Director, Saksharta Avem Satat Shiksha, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Gopinath Marg, Jaipur. 2. Chiarman And District Collector, Saksharta Avem Satat Shiksha, Dausa. 3. Secretary And Additional Collector, Vikas Saksharta Avem Satat Shiksha, Dausa Rajasthan. 4. D.o. Saksharta Avem Satat Shiksha, Dausa. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.F. Baig For Respondent(s) : None present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 28/04/2025 1. By way of filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.06.2015, whereby regularization on the post of Driver has been denied to the petitioner on account of there being no regular vacant post of Driver on the date of initial engagement of the petitioner as well as for not completing ten years of service as on 10.04.2006. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he was initially appointed as Driver by the respondents w.e.f. 26.06.1997 and by this date he has completed more than 28 years of service. [2025:RJ-JP:17900] (2 of 3) [CW-5896/2017] 3. In compliance of judgment delivered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi 2006 (4) SCC 1, in order to bring out the scheme of regularization, notification dated 27.02.2009 was issued by the respondents- Government in order to make suitable amendments in Class-IV Service Rules. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the aforesaid notification, the person who had completed ten years of service were required to be regularized, however, in the instant case when on the date of consideration i.e. in the year 2015, the petitioner had completed more than 18 years of service, he was not granted benefit of regularization. Learned counsel prays for quashing the impugned communication dated 15.06.2015 and to direct the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner. 5. Considered the contents of the writ petition as well as material on record and also heard counsel for the petitioner. 6. Bare perusal of notification dated 27.02.2009, under which the petitioner is claiming the benefits of regularization would reveal that in compliance of the aforesaid judgment delivered by Hon’ble Supreme Court, State of Karnataka(supra), one time scheme was framed, which lays down that only those candidates who had completed ten years of service as on 10.04.2006 would be considered for granting benefit of regularization, admittedly, petitioner did not complete 10 years of service as on 10.04.2006. 7. In view of above, where the action taken by the respondents is strictly in accordance with notification dated 27.02.2009, no interference is called for in the writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed. [2025:RJ-JP:17900] (3 of 3) [CW-5896/2017] 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed. 9. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J NEERU/231