[2026:RJ-JP:31869] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6572/2014 CNR: RJHC020529782014 | URN: CW / 10804U / 2014 Smt. Mukta Vig D/o Late Shri Manohar Lal Nayyar W/o Shri Ashok Kumar Vig, By Caste Punjabi Khatri, 20, Mahadev Nagar, Near Ganthi Path, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Elementary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Director, Elementary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner Rajasthan 3. Dy. Director, Elementary Education Jaipur Zone, Government Of Rajasthan, Shiksha Sankul Jln Marg, Jaipur 4. District Education Officer Elementary District Jaipur, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur 5. Block Elementary Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti Amer, P.o. Amer District Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Soni with Dr. Nitin Soni For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI Order 12/08/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: "It is, therefore, most respectfully, prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire record relating to this case and after perusing the same may be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition, and :- [2026:RJ-JP:31869] (2 of 5) [CW-6572/2014] i) By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned orders dated 13.6.2013, 6.2.2014 and 18.02.2014, be quashed and set asided, with all consequential benefits in favour of the petitioner. ii) By issuing an another appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents further be directed to accept voluntary retirement application dated 8.9.2013 and the petitioner be voluntary retired from service with all consequential benefits by giving him pension, gratuity, commuted leave and other retiral benefits by accepting her leave without pay from 9.7.1998 to 30.7.2000 and further the leave from 27.10.2010 to the date of voluntary retirement by doing her pay fixation as per rules, with all consequential benefits. iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Courts may deems think fit and proper be pass in favour of the petitioner. iv) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner." 2. Mr. Rajendra Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, learned AGC for respondents, are ad idem that the controversy in the present writ petition stands duly covered by the judgment dated 09.02.2026 passed by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5862/2022 titled as Pramod Kumar Jain & Anr. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors., wherein while considering the provisions of Rule 86(3) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (RSR), it has been held as under: "7. Rule 86 of the Service Rules (RSR), invoked by the respondents in removing the petitioners is reproduced as under: 86. Absence after expiry of leave:— (1) A Government servant who is absent from duty without leave or before leave applied for has been sanctioned by the competent authority shall be [2026:RJ-JP:31869] (3 of 5) [CW-6572/2014] treated to have remained willfully absent from duty and such absence shall amount to interruption in service involving forfeiture of past service unless, on satisfactory reasons being furnished, the absence is regularized by grant of leave due or is commuted into extra-ordinary leave by the authority competent to sanction leave (2)(a) A Government servant who remain sabsent from duty after the expiry of the sanctioned leave or after communication of refusal of extension of leave is not entitled to any pay and allowances for the period of such absence and the period of such absence shall be commuted into extraordinary leave unless on satisfactory reasons being furnished, the period of absence is regularized by grant of leave due by the authority to grant leave. (b) Willful absence from duty after the expiry of leave renders a Government servant liable to disciplinary action. (3) Notwithstanding the provisions contained in sub-rules (1) and (2) above the disciplinary authority may initiate departmental proceeding under Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control &Appeal) Rules against a Government servant who willfully remains absent from duty for a period exceeding one month and if the charge of willful absence from duty is proved against him, he may be removed from service. (4) Unless the State Government, in view of the special circumstances of the case, determines otherwise a State Government employee who remains absent from duty fora continuous period exceeding five years other than on foreign service, whether with or without leave, shall be deemed to have resigned from service. Provided that a reasonable opportunity to explain the reasons for such absence shall be given to the [2026:RJ-JP:31869] (4 of 5) [CW-6572/2014] employee before the provisions of this sub-rule are invoked. 8. Rule 86(3) of Rajasthan Civil Service (CCA) Rules, 1958empowers the disciplinary authority to initiate departmental proceeding under the CCA Rules against a government servant who willfully remains absent from duty. 9. In the instant case, the provision under Rule 86(3) of RSR was invoked and it provides that a disciplinary proceeding is required to be initiated. The petitioner no.1 was absent from14.07.2014 and on 23.01.2019 the period of absence was less than five years. There is no reason to invoke Rule 19 of CCA Rules, 1958 in the entire order dated 23.01.2019. 10. The material on record clearly indicate that the order dated23.01.2019 cannot be sustained solely on the ground that the process as prescribed under Rule 86(3) of RSR has not been adopted by the respondents before removing the petitioner no.1 from service. The counsel for petitioner has submitted that petitioner has already rendered 21 years of service before he was allegedly found absent. Therefore, petitioner No. 1 be permitted to take voluntary retirement or alternatively, he be removed compulsorily so that he may get service benefits. 11. The matter is crystal clear on record that the process, as prescribed for removal has not been adopted by respondent No. 2 before issuing order dated 23.01.2019, hence, the order itself is illegal and contrary to law, therefore, the issue regarding VRS or any other can be raised when a charge memo is served upon petitioner No. 1 in accordance with CCA Rules, 1958. 12. In view of discussion made herein above, the writ petition preferred by the petitioners is hereby allowed and order dated 23.01.2019 and subsequent communication regarding removal of petitioner is hereby quashed and set aside. The petitioner No. 1 is reinstated in the service of respondents,with all benefits as per Rules. [2026:RJ-JP:31869] (5 of 5) [CW-6572/2014] 13. The respondents are free to initiate action for willful absence after complying the provision under Rule 86(3) of RSR, and serving a charge memo to the petitioners No. 1. 14. The writ petition along with misc. application, if any, stands disposed of." 3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 13.06.2013 (Annexure-12), whereby the petitioner was removed from service by invoking the provisions of Rule 86(3) of RSR, and so also the consequential orders dated 06.02.2014 (Annexure-17) and 18.02.2014 (Annexure-18), are quashed. 4. The petitioner is directed to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits to which she is eligible as per the Rules, forthwith. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings after duly complying with the provisions of Rule 86(3) of RSR. 5. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (ANUROOP SINGHI),J 29/DIPESH CHAYAL