[2025:RJ-JP:46815] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11836/2023 1. Suresh Kumar Son Of Shri Prabhu Lal, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Near M.d. Mission Hospital, Rojadi, Kota (Raj.). 2. Mukesh Kumar Verma Son Of Shri Tejpal Verma, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of House Number 363, Sector- 2, Ward No. 77, Keshavpura-Iind, Kota (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health Services, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005. 2. Director (Non Gazetted) Medical And Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005. 3. Additional Director (Gezetted) Medical And Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.)-302005. 4. Superintendent Of Naveen Chikitsalaya, Medical College Parisar, Kota (Raj.). 5. Principal And Controller Government Medical College And Associated Group Of Hospitals, Kota (Raj.). ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11923/2023 1. Deepak Kumar Pareta Son Of Brijraj, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of House No 1013-B, Shri Nath Puram, Kota-324010 (Raj.) 2. Yogendra Goswami Son Of Mohan Goswami, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Purani Forest Chowki Road, Sakatpura, Kota (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health Services, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005. [2025:RJ-JP:46815] (2 of 5) [CW-11836/2023] 2. Director (Non Gazetted) Medical And Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005. 3. Additional Director (Gezetted) Medical And Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.)-302005. 4. Superintendent Of Naveen Chikitsalaya, Medical College Parisar, Kota (Raj.). 5. Principal And Controller Government Medical College And Associated Group Of Hospitals, Kota (Raj.). ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13882/2023 Dinesh Kumar Suman Son Of Shri Kiran Lal, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of 140, Near Mahadev Mandir, Keshoraipatan, Distt. Bundi, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director, Medical And Health, Directorate, Jaipur. 3. Superintendent And Member Secretary, R.m.r.s., Mbs Hospital, Kota. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13893/2023 Vijay Kant Verma Son Of Shri Nathu Lal Verma, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 106, Mahdeo Colony, Badi Nagfani, Boraj Road, Ajmer (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Medical Health And Family Welfare, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005. 2. Director (Non Gazetted) Medical And Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) [2025:RJ-JP:46815] (3 of 5) [CW-11836/2023] 3. Additional Director (Gezetted) Medical And Health Services, Sawasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.)- 302005. 4. Principal Medical Officer, Government General Hospital, Nasirabad, Ajmer (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh Mr. Iliyas Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC with Mr. Prakhar Jain and Mr. Rahul Verma Mr. Yash Joshi for Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 19/11/2025 IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 11836/2023, 11923/2023 and 13882/2023 1. All these matters are connected and they raise common question. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners while placing reliance upon order dated 22.03.2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4101/2024 : Bharti Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. Passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur on the basis of judgment in case of Suresh Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5694/2021 decided on 14.07.2023 and Narendra Barwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1669/2022 decided on 05.05.2022 has submitted that the ratio as propounded in aforesaid case has already been approved by the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court at Principal Seat, [2025:RJ-JP:46815] (4 of 5) [CW-11836/2023] Jodhpur in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.862/2024 : State of Rajasthan and Ors. Vs. Bharti. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these writ petitions be disposed of in view of ratio laid down in aforementioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if the ratio is applicable on facts of the case then they have no objection in disposal of these writ petitions. 4. Having considered aforesaid these writ petitions preferred by the petitioners are disposed of in terms of ratio as laid down in case of Suresh Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra) and Bharti Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra). If the petitioners are entitled for benefit, the respondents are under an obligation to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with ratio as laid down in aforementioned cases. 5. Before parting with, we want to clarify that we have not considered the veracity of the facts as mentioned by the petitioners but in case of deviation from the claim made by the petitioners, the respondents are at liberty to consider and pass an appropriate, reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid the writ petitions stand disposed of with pending application, if any. In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13893/2023:- 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance upon order dated 05.05.2022 in Narendra Barwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1669/2022 submits that the writ petition may also be disposed of in light of [2025:RJ-JP:46815] (5 of 5) [CW-11836/2023] the ratio laid down in case of Narendra Barwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra). 2. Mr. Yash Joshi for Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG submits that liberty be granted to them to verify the veracity of the facts as contended by the petitioner. 3. Having considered aforesaid instant writ petition preferred by the petitioner is disposed of in terms of ratio as laid down in case of Narendra Barwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra). If the petitioner is entitled for benefit, the respondents are under an obligation to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with ratio as mentioned hereinabove. 4. Before parting with, we want to clarify that we have not considered the veracity of the facts as mentioned by the petitioner but in case of deviation from the claim made by the petitioner, the respondents are at liberty to consider and pass an appropriate, reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid the writ petition stands disposed of with pending application, if any. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/113-114, 362 and 363