Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49370 (RAJ)

SEEMA MEENA D/O PEETAM CHAND MEENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/15769/2025 · 2025-10-15

Ashok Kumar Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:42297] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15769/2025 Seema Meena D/o Peetam Chand Meena, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village And Post-Rasidpur, Tehsil-Mahwa, District-Dausa, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Education Department Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 2. The Director, (Primary Education), Rajasthan, Bikaner 3. The District Education Officer (Elementary Education), Headquarter Barmer 4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Barmer 5. Radha Meena D/o Ramavatar Meena, Through Director Elementary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner 6. Manisha Meena D/o Kamlesh Meena, Through Director Elementary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Atul Kumar Jain Mr. Hemraj Rodiya For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 15/10/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the recruitment process, petitioner has secured 157.8334 marks in S.T. category and while filing her preference in counseling, petitioner preferred Dausa as her first district for posting, for Teacher Gr.III Level 2 (Science/Math). [2025:RJ-JP:42297] (2 of 3) [CW-15769/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that allotment list dated 15.03.2024 was issued by the Office of Director of Primary Education, Rajasthan for granting first posting to the candidates selected through RPSC, RSSB or any other recruiting agency. He also submits that as per the circular dated 18.05.2020, issued by the Administrative Reforms Department, the place of posting shall be assigned as per merit cum preference. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the persons lower in merit than the petitioner have although been assigned their home district, yet the petitioner despite giving her first preference, the same has not been considered and the petitioner has been posted at Barmer. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that similar controversy was considered by this Hon’ble Court in the case of Kindar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6507/2017) decided on 04.08.2021. Thereafter considered and relied by order dated 28.08.2025 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12876/2025 Omprakash Gurjar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 5. In the light of above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with directions to the petitioner to make a representation in the light of circular dated 18.05.2020 issued by the Administrative Reform Department and order dated 04.08.2021 passed by this Court in case of Kindar Vs State of Rajasthan (supra). In case, the respondents find that the case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid circular and order dated 04.08.2021 passed by this Court, then appropriate order for [2025:RJ-JP:42297] (3 of 3) [CW-15769/2025] modifying her place of posting may be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of submitting a representation along with certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case. 6. Instant civil writ petition with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /26