[2025:RJ-JP:6383] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5528/2019 Ashwani Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Sundar Lal Sharma, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Resident Plot No. 23, Maratha Colony, Opp. Sangam Marriage Garden, Jaipur Road, Tonk. At Present Working As A Asi, At Police Line Tonk. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Director General Of Police Rajasthan, Jaipur Lal Kothi Jaipur. 4. Inspector General Of Police, Ajmer Range, Ajmer. 5. Superintendent Of Police, Distt. Tonk. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.894/2020 Kailash Chand Meena Son Of Shri Narayan Meena, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Fulwara, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan Jaipur Lal Kothi Jaipur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4285/2020 Jaipal Singh Bishnoi (Dharnia) S/o Shri Rampal Dharnia, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Plot No. 5-C, 122 Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, [2025:RJ-JP:6383] (2 of 5) [CW-5528/2019] Bikaner. At Present Working On The Post Of Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Iiird Rac, Bikaner. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan Jaipur, Lal Kothi, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.S. Gouttam For Respondent(s) : Mr. Samee Khan & Mr. Parth Sharma for Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, AAG JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 13/02/2025 1. Since common question of facts and law are involved in all these three petitions, hence with the consent of counsel for the parties, all these matters are taken up for final disposal and are being decided by this common order. 2. For convenience the facts as well as prayer mentioned in SB Civil Writ Petition No.5528/2019 has been taken into consideration. The aforesaid writ petition has been preferred with the following prayer:- “(I) By issuing any appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby direct the respondents to open the envelop of result of promotion [2025:RJ-JP:6383] (3 of 5) [CW-5528/2019] on the post of Sub-Inspector of the petitioner who is kept in sealed cover vide order. (II) By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby direct the respondents to give posting to the petitioner on the promotional post i.e. Sub-Inspector with all consequential benefits. (III) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the petitioner may kindly be passed with cost.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were permitted to appear in the departmental examination for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector against the vacancies of year 2010-11 but on account of pendency of criminal case under Sections 7 & 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1988”) and under Section 120-B IPC, the result of the petitioners was kept in a sealed cover. Learned counsel submits that all the three petitioners namely Ashwani Kumar Sharma has been acquitted on 22.11.2024, Kailash Chand Meena has been acquitted on 06.02.2025 and Jaipal Singh Bishnoi (Dharnia) has been acquitted on 30.07.2024. Learned counsel submits that as per the circular dated 04.06.2008 issued by the Department of Personnel, Government of Rajasthan, the result of examination for promotion of Government employee would be kept in a sealed cover when a departmental proceedings/criminal case is pending or such employee is under suspension. Learned counsel submits that neither any departmental proceedings have been initiated against [2025:RJ-JP:6383] (4 of 5) [CW-5528/2019] the petitioners nor petitioners are under suspension. The sole reason for keeping their result of promotion in the sealed cover is pendency of criminal cases against them. Learned counsel submits that after acquittal of the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to get the results of their promotion examination, so under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioners and submitted that because of pendency of criminal case, the results of the petitioners were kept in sealed cover. Learned counsel submits that the Department is not aware about the judgment of acquittal of all the petitioners, so unless and until, those judgments are placed before the authority concerned, no orders can be passed. Learned counsel submits that as per the circular dated 04.06.2008, the promotion results of a Government employee would be kept in sealed cover, if any departmental proceedings/criminal case is pending against him or if he is placed under suspension. 5. Upon being asked by this Court as to whether any departmental proceedings are pending against the petitioners or not, learned counsel for the respondents was not in a position to apprise this Court about the above factual aspect of the matter. 6. Considering the arguments of the rival sides and looking to the fact that all the three petitioners have been acquitted from all charges by the competent court of law by three different judgments, these writ petitions stand disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to submit an application before the respondents [2025:RJ-JP:6383] (5 of 5) [CW-5528/2019] along-with copy of the judgments of their acquittal within a period of seven days from the date of passing of this order. The respondents are directed to decide the said application in the light of the circular dated 04.06.2008 and pass appropriate orders expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of six weeks thereafter. 7. Stay applications as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. 8. In case, the petitioners are found suitable for promotion, they would be entitled to get all consequential benefits. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/5-7