[2025:RJ-JP:45323-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 969/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24378/2018 1. Rajasthan Housing Board, Through Its Chairman, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur. 2. Housing Commissioner, Rajasthan Housing Board, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur. ----Appellants Versus 1. Kuldeep Narayan Mathur S/o Lt. Shri Rameshwar Narayan Mathur, Aged About 67 Years, Resident Of 5-Jha-21 Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. Shekhar Kumar Shivhare S/o Lt. Professor G.C. Shivhare, Aged About 68 Years, Resident Of House No. 48, Dhuleshwar Garden, Sardar Patel Marg, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG assisted by Mr. Yash Joshi, Mr. Sankalp Vijay & Ms. Tanvisha Pant For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Saxena HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 11/11/2025 1. Admittedly Resolution No.173.37 providing five years of experience for the purpose of consideration of promotion to the post of Additional Chief Engineer from the post of Deputy Housing Commissioner (Superintending Engineer) had not been sanctioned by the State Government. Relying upon the such resolution, therefore, was unjustified on the part of the appellants. [2025:RJ-JP:45323-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-969/2025] 2. The order dated 20.08.2018 denying the respondents' rights of cancellation for promotion to the post of Additional Chief Engineer on the ground of not possessing five years experience as Deputy Housing Commissioner is found to be unjustified. 3. The learned Single Judge has, therefore, correctly reached to the conclusion that the order dated 20.08.2018 was not sustainable in the eyes of law. The very basis of the requirement of five years of experience cannot be said to be available with the Housing Board. More so as the Secretary, Department of Urban Development in his letter dated 09.05.2023 acknowledges that the resolution has not received sanctioned/approval from the State Government. 4. In view thereto, the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not warrant any interference. 5. This appeal is dismissed accordingly. 6. All pending applications also stand disposed of. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ GOURAV/MAHIMA/70