[2025:RJ-JP:46087] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16621/2025 Rameshwar Lal Son Of Shri Nanu Ram, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of 255, Sihor Badi, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To Government, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner 3. District Education Officer (Hq), Secondary Education, Sikar (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Gupta Ms. Sampati Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 14/11/2025 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers: “It is therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed that your lordships may graciously be pleased to call for the entire record of the case and after examining the same allow the present writ petition and - (i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the non-petitioners may kindly be directed to count the seniority of the petitioner from 9.2.1990 (the date on which his junior persons were given appointment on the post of Jr. Assistant (LDC) in pursuance of advertisement issued by the non-petitioners in [2025:RJ-JP:46087] (2 of 3) [CW-16621/2025] the year 1986). (ii) by further appropriate writ, order or direction, the non- petitioners may kindly be directed to fix the notional salary of the petitioner at par with the date of joining the services by his junior persons who were appointed on the post of Jr. Assistant (LDC) on 9.2.1990.(iii) by further appropriate writ, order or direction, the non-petitioners may kindly be directed to give all other benefits like promotion etc. to the petitioner at bar with his junior persons who were given appointment in pursuance of advertisement issued in the year 1986. (iv) by further appropriate writ, order or direction, the non- petitioners may kindly be directed that after fixation of salary of the petitioner at par with his junior persons who were appointed on 9.2.1990, all the arrears of salary be paid to the petitioner along with interest @ 18% p.a. (v) any other beneficial order or direction, which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the humble petitioner. (vi) costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while placing reliance upon order dated 23.09.2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13923/2019 Balkishan Pareek Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors passed by a Co-ordinate Bench at Principal Seat Jodhpur and submits that the controversy involved in the current petition is already set at rest by following judgment in case of Om Prakash [2025:RJ-JP:46087] (3 of 3) [CW-16621/2025] & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21214/2017) decided on 21.11.2017. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring order dated 08.07.2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10044/2024 Priya Jain Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. submits that the identical issue is already settled in case of Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21214/2017, on the basis of judgment in case of Hemlata Shrimali & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3247/2015 relying upon judgment in case of Suman Bai & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Reported as 2009 (1) WLC (Raj) 381. He further submits that instant writ petition be disposed of in accordance with judgments referred by him. 3. Having considered submissions and also material on record, the instant writ petition is disposed of in light of order passed in case of Hemlata Shrimali (supra) and Suman Bai (supra) and noticed in case of Om Prakash (supra) and Priya Jain (supra), 4. The writ petition is disposed of on the basis of submissions made in the writ petition but respondents would be free to examine the veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case of avernments made therein are found to be correct, with applicability of ratio, the petitioner would be entitled to be relief. 5. Misc. application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /202