[2025:RJ-JP:47161] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 25429/2018 Saroj Yadav W/o Anil Kumar D/o Jagram Yadav, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Karwar Ki Dhani, Tehsil Kotkasim, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) 2. Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Jaipur Division, Shiksha Sankul, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. Vijay Kumar Sharma, Lecturer (Geography), Govt. Sec. Senior Secondary, School, Roadkalan, District Kaurali (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devansh Sharma, Dy.GC Mr. Vijay Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 21/11/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to permit the petitioner to join on the post of Teacher School Lecturer Grade-I (Home Science) in pursuance of the order dated 13.03.2018 or in alternate the respondents may be directed to include the name of the petitioner in the list of promotion issued on 09.06.2018 as regards the promotion to the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2018-19. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Teacher Grade-II on [2025:RJ-JP:47161] (2 of 6) [CW-25429/2018] 14.09.2012 and she was said to have been allowed promotion on the post of School Lecturer (Home Science) vide order dated 13.03.2018 against the vacancy of the year 2017-18, but since the said promotion and posting order was never intimated at the place of posting of the petitioner at the relevant time and she was not relieved for joining on the promotional post that was illegally treated against the petitioner as it the petitioner choose to forego the promotion. 3. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has also completed her post graduate degree in Geography in the year 2017 and entry of the same was made in the service book of the petitioner on 12.03.2018 and she became eligible for promotion to the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2018-19. 4. Learned counsel further submits that the respondents have issued promotion order for the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2018-19 and gave promotion to the persons who were junior to her ignoring the claim of the petitioner for promotion. He also submits that though the petitioner has been promoted to the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2020-21, in such circumstances the petitioner be held to be entitled for promotion to the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2018-19 and be allowed all other consequential benefits. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the claim of the petitioner is not sustainable for the reasons that the petitioner was initially allowed promotion on the post of School Lecturer (Home Science) vide order dated 18.03.2018 and since [2025:RJ-JP:47161] (3 of 6) [CW-25429/2018] she has not joined on the promotional post, she was treated to have foregone the promotion and in such circumstances, the claim of an employee for promotion is deferred for further period of three years. He also submits that after three years, the petitioner has already been accorded promotion on the post of School Lecturer against the vacancy of the year 2020-21. 6. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the material made available on record. 7. As per the facts on record, the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Teacher Grade-II (English) on 14.09.2012. The petitioner has also completed her post graduate course in Geography on 23.09.2017 and the entry in regard to that was recorded in service book of the petitioner on 12.03.2018. 8. The petitioner is said to have been given promotion on the post of School Lecturer (Home Science) vide order dated 13.03.2018. The order dated 13.03.2018 speaks that in case any employee is given promotion, may give in writing if he wants to forego the promotion. It is also stated in this order that in case an employee does not forego promotion by giving in writing to the concerned Principal or head of the institution, the authority is under obligation to relieve the employee for joining on the promotional post. 9. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the order of the promotion dated 13.03.2018 was never served to the petitioner at the place of her posting at the relevant time. He also placed on record a letter dated 01.06.2018 written by the Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Khanpur Dagran (Kotkasim, District Alwar) where the petitioner was posted on [2025:RJ-JP:47161] (4 of 6) [CW-25429/2018] 13.03.2018, wherein the Principal has stated that the order dated 13.03.2018 as regards the promotion of the petitioner to the post of School Lecturer (Home Science) against the vacancy of the year 2017-18 was never received in the school and therefore, there is no occasion for the Principal to relieve the petitioner for joining on the promotional post. 10. 10. The respondents are not controverting this letter written by the Principal (Annexure-7), though counsel for the petitioner has stated that it is to be seen whether the Principal is the authority to write such a letter but the counsel for the State himself was unable to show that the Principal was not having authority to write such letter. In that situation the letter dated 01.06.2018 written by the Principal is said to be presumed as written within his authority. The Principal has authority to write such letter as this letter safeguards the rights of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that vide promotion order 09.06.2018 made by the respondents on the post of School Lecture (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2018-19, the persons junior to the petitioner have been allowed promotion. Learned counsel for the State also admits this fact that the persons who are junior to the petitioner have been accorded promotion on the post of School Lecturer (Geography) on 09.06.2018. 11. Taking into consideration the material facts that earlier promotion order dated 13.03.2018 was not served to the petitioner or at the school where she was posted and further vide order dated 09.06.2018, the petitioner has been deprived from promotion to the post of School Lecturer (Geography) though, the persons who are junior to the petitioner have been allowed [2025:RJ-JP:47161] (5 of 6) [CW-25429/2018] promotion, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for promotion for the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the vacancy of the year 2018-19. 12. The contention of counsel appearing for the State is that since the petitioner did not join on the promotional post of School Lecturer (Home Science) as promoted vide order dated 13.03.2018, it would be deemed that the petitioner has foregone the promotion is not acceptable for the reasons that the respondents have failed to prove that the promotion order dated 13.03.2018 was served either to the petitioner or to the school where the petitioner was working at the relevant time and they have also failed to prove that the petitioner was ever relieved from the place of posting where she was working at the relevant time so as to join on the post of promotion. 13. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed. 14. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is held to be entitled for promotion on the post of School Lecturer (Geography) against the persons who are junior to her have been allowed promotion vide order dated 09.06.2018. The petitioner would be entitled for all consequential benefits. 15. It is made clear that the petitioner would be entitled for salary on notional basis and in view of enhancing of any pay in furtherance of notional benefits, the petitioner would be entitled for actual benefits from the date of her joining on the post of School Lecturer (Geography) in pursuance to the promotion order dated 02.02.2021. [2025:RJ-JP:47161] (6 of 6) [CW-25429/2018] 16. The exercise of issuing the necessary orders as per the directions of this Court be made by the respondents within a period of two months from today. 17. Let this matter be placed before this Court after two months so as to see the compliance of the order has been made. 18. Since the main petition has been allowed, the pending application, if any, and the application (IA No.1/2025) also stand disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /16