[2025:RJ-JP:31675] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 26701/2018 Sabbir Khan S/o Patwari Khan, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Mallyerjatt, Post Bilaspur, Tehsil Tijara, Disstt. Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. Director, Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Additional Director, Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 4. The Joint Director, Medical And Health Services, Jaipur Zone, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 5. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Alwar. 6. The Medical Officer Cum Chc-Incharge, Tijara, District Alwar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Judgment / Order 13/08/2025 This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.09.2018 issued by the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Alwar and addressed to the Medical Officer In-Charge, Community Health Center, Tijara, Bhiwadi whereby, a direction was issued to remove the contractual employees from honorary service as also the order dated 24.10.2018 passed by the Medical Officer In- Charge, Community Health Center, Tijara, Alwar whereby, the [2025:RJ-JP:31675] (2 of 2) [CW-26701/2018] contractual engagement of the petitioner was terminated inasmuch as they were engaged without competent sanction from the Administrative Department. Indisputably, petitioner was engaged as a contractual employee through a private placement agency with no privity of contract with the respondents. In the case of Ram Khilari and Others Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14835/2021 involving identical controversy, this Court, vide its order dated 23.05.2025, relying upon the precedential law, held that the contractual employees engaged through the private placement agency with no privity of contract with the State and its instrumentalities, have no right to continue in service. The aforesaid legal proposition could not be disputed even by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the backdrop of aforesaid precedent, the petitioner is not found to be entitled for any relief from this Court. Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J YOGESH/42