[2025:RJ-JP:50377] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19540/2025 Dr Lovesh Katewa S/o Shri Ajay Kumar Katewa, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 117, Everst Vihar, Near Om Hotel, Kings Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Medical And Health Department, Tonk Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Garssa For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakhar Jain for Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 11/12/2025 1. Instant writ petition is filed by petitioner with following prayers: “1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned action of the respondents and respondents may restrain to replace the petitioners from another set of urgent temporary basis persons and not discontinued the services of the petitioners till availability of vacancies of Medical officers in the Respondents Department; 2. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Respondents to allow the Petitioners to continue in his posts as Medical Officer at his respective District Tonk, Rajasthan, will all consequential benefits including salary and allowances. [2025:RJ-JP:50377] (2 of 2) [CW-19540/2025] 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while placing reliance upon order dated 20.09.2025 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18352/2025 Dr. Sagar Ray Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. Submits that an identical issues raised by present petitioner is already decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur and this writ petition be disposed of in accordance with order passed in case of Sagar Ray (supra). 3. Mr. Prakhar Jain on behalf of Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC accepts notice on behalf of respondent(s) and Office is directed to reflect name of Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC as counsel for respondent(s). 4. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is appropriate to dispose of writ petition in terms of order passed in case of Sagar Ray (supra) but if there is factual difference in current case, then the respondent(s) are at liberty to pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order. 5. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the instant writ petition is disposed of in terms of order passed in case of Dr. Sagar Ray (supra) but the respondent(s) are at liberty to examine the case of petitioners and in case of factual difference they are free to pass an appropriate order which should be speaking and reasoned. The entire exercise to be completed within 60 days of receipt of copy of the order. 6. The respondent(s) are under an obligation to communicate the decision to the petitioners. 7. Writ petition and misc. application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /52