AMIT KUMAR S/O SHRI SANJAY KUMAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/12649/2026 · 2026-07-22
Rekha Borana
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 11152 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 11152 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:28198] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12649/2026 URN: CW / 27752U / 2026 Amit Kumar S/o Shri Sanjay Kumar, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Village Meharadasi, Post Meharadasi, Tehsil Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj).
2. Collector And District Magistrate, Office Of District Programme Coordinator (Egs) And District Collector, Jhunjhunu
3. Commissioner, Egs, Anubhag-3, Mahatma Gandhi Nrega, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
4. Chief Executive Officer, Office Of Additional District Programme Coordinator, Mahatma Gandhi Nrega (Zila Parishad), Jhunjhunu
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Alsisar, District Jhunjhunu ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Chetani HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order 22/07/2026
1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of order dated 25.06.2026 (Annexure-13) whereby appointment of the petitioner as 'Junior Technical Assistant' on contractual basis in terms of the Rajasthan Contractual Hiring to Civil Posts Rules, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 2022'), stood canceled.
[2026:RJ-JP:28198] (2 of 3) [CW-12649/2026]
2. The facts are that the petitioner was afforded appointment vide order dated 23.01.2026 (Annexure-8). Prior to the same, an affidavit was filed by him with an averment that an FIR has been lodged against him. Consequent to the same, Police verification was conducted whereby it was found that charge-sheet dated 26.02.2020 had already been filed against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 43, 66 & 72 of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008; Sections 3 & 6 of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfairmeans) Act, 1992; and Sections 420 & 120B, IPC.
3. In view of the aforesaid and in terms of circular dated 04.12.2019, petitioner was found disentitled to be appointed and hence his appointment order stood canceled.
4. Counsel for the petitioner while relying upon the Co-ordinate Bench judgment of this Court in Neeraj Kanwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9517/2024 (decided on 27.03.2025) submitted that order impugned dated 25.06.2026 has been passed in a mechanical manner while relying upon Circular dated 04.12.2019, whereas as per the ratio laid down in Neeraj Kanwar (supra), an appointment cannot be denied solely on the ground of a pending criminal case. The Competent Authority is under an obligation to consider the facts and circumstances of each case, the nature of work and status of the post while deciding the suitability or unsuitability of a candidate. Therein, the Court held that the Appointing Authority has to assess the candidate's character by taking into
consideration the circumstances of the offence. Counsel hence
[2026:RJ-JP:28198] (3 of 3) [CW-12649/2026] submitted that order impugned having been passed in a mechanical manner deserves interference by this Court.
5. Keeping into consideration the arguments as raised by Counsel for the petitioner, this Court directed him to place on record FIR/Final Report vide which he had been accused. The same has been placed on record today.
6. After perusing challan papers dated 29.12.2019, it is evident that the petitioner has been accused of the allegations related to paper leak and even remained in custody for 63 days. In that view, the offences of which the petitioner has been accused, definitely involve moral turpitude.
7. In view of the same, applying the ratio laid down in Neeraj Kanwar (supra), this Court is of the clear opinion that the petitioner has rightly not been held entitled for appointment in terms of the circular dated 04.12.2019.
8. In view of the above ratio, no case for interference is made out and the present writ petition is hence, dismissed.
9. Stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J 80/ANMOL