HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 428/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur ----Appellant Versus Tulchhi Ram ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 371/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur ----Appellant Versus Madan Lal ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 407/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, ----Appellant Versus Sunil ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 408/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, ----Appellant Versus Sanjay ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 416/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, ----Appellant Versus Nirmala ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 424/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, ----Appellant Versus Ashok ----Respondent (2 of 5) [SAW-428/2020] D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 438/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur ----Appellant Versus Smt. Neeta ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 442/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, ----Appellant Versus Kalawati Kanojiya ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 443/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur ----Appellant Versus Smt. Ghevanri ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 445/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation ----Appellant Versus Meenakshi Kanwar ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 467/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur ----Appellant Versus Smt. Rekha Devi ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 469/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corp. ----Appellant Versus Smt. Manjusha ----Respondent (3 of 5) [SAW-428/2020] D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 490/2020 Jodhpur Municipal Corporation ----Appellant Versus Sharda ----Respondent D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 42/2021 Jodhpur Municipal Corp. Jodhpur ----Appellant Versus Leela Devi ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Suniel Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lokesh Mathur, Mr. S.S. Nirban, Mr. Rishabh Tayal, Mr. S.R. Pandit, Ms. Preet Kamal Sidhu Mr. Akshay Nagori Mr. Sudhir Saruparia HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 07/09/2022 The present special appeal has been filed assailing the order of the learned Single Judge, whereby a direction has been issued to reinstate the respondents on the post of Safai Karamchari with all consequential benefits. Learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that the respondents, while seeking appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari, submitted false affidavit indicating inter-alia that he/she had less than two children after the cut-off date i.e. 01.06.2002. However, upon scrutiny of record, it was found that (4 of 5) [SAW-428/2020] each of respondents was having more than two children after the cut-off date. He submitted that the appointments of the respondents were rightly cancelled and, therefore, the same should not have been interfered with by the learned Single Judge. Per contra, it was submitted on behalf of the respondents that Rule 9A of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Safai Employees Service) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2012’), which provides that any person, who has more than two children on or after 01.06.2022, shall not be eligible for appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari, has been declared to be ultra-vires by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 02.04.2019 rendered in a batch of writ petitions led by D.B. Civil Writ Petition NO.16572/2018 [Anita & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.]. It was, thus, submitted that the condition of having two or less than two children for appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari cannot be imposed upon the respondents and thus, even if the declaration was erroneous, it could not be treated as an impediment against their selection against the post. The matter requires consideration. Admit. Since the respondents are represented through their respective counsel, notices need not be issued. In view of the fact that a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Anita (supra), has struck down the Rule 9A of the Rules of 2012, we find no reason to continue the interim order passed by this Court in these appeals. Accordingly, the interim order, passed in these Special Appeals stand vacated. (5 of 5) [SAW-428/2020] The stay applications stand dismissed. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J 79-92-skm/-