[2026:RJ-JP:33051] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15154/2026 CNR: RJHC020744542026 | URN: CW / 32282U / 2026 Mithlesh Kumari Daughter Of Sh. Banesingh, Wife Of Sh. Ravinder Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Nangla-Tulsi, Maloni, Roopwas, District Bharatpur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dholpur. 4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary Education, Dholpur. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18985/2025 CNR: RJHC021005712025 | URN: CW / 42629U / 2025 Manish Kumar Katara Son Of Brijendra Vihari Katara, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Village Baroli Brahman, Post Dahina Gaon,tehsil Roopwas, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Deprtment Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dausa, Rajasthan. 3. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner. 4. The Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Mahwa, District Dausa, Rajasthan. 5. The District Education Officer (Elementary Education), Dausa. 6. The Chief Block Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti Mahwa, District Dausa. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 385/2026 CNR: RJHC020009732026 | URN: CW / 815U / 2026 Ranjeet Singh Son Of Shri Tota Ram, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Village Algarji Ka Nagla, Moodiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (2 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bharatpur District Bharatpur (Raj.) 4. The District Education Officer, District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 511/2026 CNR: RJHC020023942026 | URN: CW / 1095U / 2026 Kaluaram Son Of Syodan Singh, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Village Nagla Algarji, Post Khedli Gadasia, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Deeg District Deeg (Raj.) 4. The District Education Officer, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6209/2026 CNR: RJHC020315772026 | URN: CW / 13718U / 2026 Narendra Singh Kuntal S/o Bane Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vpo Gunsara, Tehsil Kumber, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, School Of Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary Education, Nagaur. 5. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15890/2026 CNR: RJHC020789152026 | URN: CW / 33828U / 2026 Ranjeet Singh Olkha S/o Vidhyadhar Singh Olkha, Aged About [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (3 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] 42 Years, R/o Indrapura, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of School Education, Govt. Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 4. The District Education Officer, Samagra Shiksha, Jhunjhunu. 5. The Chief Block Education Officer, Samagra Shiksha, Block Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu 6. The Principal, Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Nangal, Panchayat Samiti Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14072/2026 CNR: RJHC020726692026 | URN: CW / 30465U / 2026 Radhe Shyam Gameti S/o Badri Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Vpo Jawada Ii, Tehsil Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Commissioner, College Education, Shiksha Shankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur 4. The Joint Director (Hrd), Commissionerate Of College, Education, Rajasthan, Jaipur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15921/2026 CNR: RJHC020772962026 | URN: CW / 33905U / 2026 [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (4 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] Vikas Kumar Gupta S/o Girraj Prasad Gupta, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Nehru Colony, Bedha Ki Dhani, Lalsot District Dausa, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Cooperative Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Managing Director, Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd., Saras Sankul, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur. 4. The Managing Director, Alwar Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15922/2026 CNR: RJHC020772972026 | URN: CW / 33906U / 2026 Ajay Singh S/o Nahar Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Vpo Santaruk, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, School Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary Education, Dholpur. 5. The Chief Block Education Officer, Block Dholpur District Dholpur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14546/2026 CNR: RJHC020722462026 | URN: CW / 31255U / 2026 [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (5 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] Sanjay Kumar Mina, S/o Shri Ravi Kumar Mina, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Mahadev Ji Ka Mohalla, Village Kurasiya, Post Botunda, Tehsil Todaraisingh, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Additional Commissioner, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur. 3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board (Rssb), Through Its Secretary, State Institute Of Agriculture Management Campus, Durgapura, Tonk Road, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitin Jain Mr. Balveer Singh Beniwal Mr. R. P. Saini with Mr. Aamir Khan Mr. Laxmi Kant Malpura For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Naruka, AAG with Mr. Jitendra Kr. Takar & Ms. Ritika Naruka Mr. Saurabh Sharma for Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC Mr. Manish Bhardwaj for Mr. Nalin G. Narayan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 18/08/2026 1. In the present batch of writ petitions, the scope of the controversy involved, albeit not limited to but is broadly and predominantly defined by the challenge raised regarding the arbitrariness allegedly inflicted upon the petitioners by directing [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (6 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] them to undergo fresh medical examination for the reassessment of their permanent hearing impairment, following the lawful appointment of the petitioners. 2. Consequently, considering the fact that the writ petitions warrant adjudication on common questions of law and fact; with the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the parties, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15154/2026 titled Mithlesh Kumari v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., is being taken up as the lead petition. It is cautiously clarified that any discrepancies in the present batch of writ petitions, pertain purely to the factual narratives contained therein and not vis-a-vis the questions of law to be determined by this Court; the instant judgment shall be applicable on all the petitions connected herein/henceforth on mutatis mutandis basis. 3. The factual matrix of the lead matter reveals that the petitioner is aggrieved by the allegedly arbitrary and illegal action of the respondents in directing the petitioner to undergo a fresh medical examination for the reassessment of her permanent hearing impairment, following her lawful appointment as Teacher Grade-3 (Level-I). 4. It is pleaded that the petitioner possessed a valid disability certificate dated 23.12.2021 certifying 42% disability, and the petitioner was declared medically fit by the respondents prior to her appointment. The petitioner joined the service on 13.08.2022 and has been continuing since then. The core grievance of the petitioner is that despite repeated verification, the respondents, vide circular dated 28.08.2025 and subsequent communications, have directed another reassessment, which is put to challenge by [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (7 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] way of the present petition as the same being issued without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions enshrined under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short, ‘the Act of 2016’), and violative of Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India. 5. The present petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, whereby, declare the action of respondents in conducting/re- examination of permanent hearing impairment of petitioner is illegal, unjust, unfair, arbitrary and unreasonable. ii) Or in alternatively, issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, whereby, direct the respondents to re- examine the permanent physical impairment (HI) by duly constituted Medical Board at SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur; (iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction restraining the respondents or any other authority acting under them from taking any coercive or adverse action against the petitioner; (iv) Declare that the petitioner's disability certificate dated 23.12.2021 (Annexure-1), as reaffirmed by Medical Board is valid and conclusive for all service-related purposes unless challenged or revoked by a competent medical authority under due process of law; (v) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, whereby, any order passed during pendency of the writ petition which may be prejudice to the interest of the petitioner may be taken on record and the same may be quashed and set aside by this Hon'ble Court. (vi) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner along with costs of the writ petition." 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners jointly submit that the competent authority as per the provisions enshrined under the Act of 2016 had duly issued the disability certificate to the petitioners, [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (8 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] and it is a matter of fact that there exists a vast disparity between the evaluations. It is vehemently contended that subjecting the appointed candidates to repeated medical examinations and issuance of multiple certificates amount to sheer harassment, especially when the parameters to selection was strictly adhered to by the petitioners. 7. It is further argued that any alleged variations or differences in the disability percentage of the petitioners have arisen purely on account of age, differences in calculation methods, changing medical techniques, or shifting norms/regulations, and the same were not attributed to mala fides of the petitioners. 8. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. S.S. Naruka, alongside Mr. Gopal Sharma, AGC, and Mr. Archit Bohra appearing for the respondents, vehemently opposed the present petition and submit that is a settled proposition of law that re- verification at the behest of the respondent-employer is permissible, notwithstanding the disability certificate issued as per the provisions enshrined under the Act of 2016. 9. Relying upon the DoPT Circular dated 15.07.2026 and erstwhile instructions dated 25.08.2025, it is submitted that such re-verification is not barred and the same be carried out by subject experts to evaluate the utility and fitness of the petitioners-employees in the public interest. It is further submitted that a genuine candidate suffers no prejudice upon rightful evaluation. 10. The respondent-State assures that a self-sustained circular is in place which encompasses an appellate mechanism, safeguarding the principles of natural justice, and the State is [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (9 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] bound to comply with the said Circular dated 15.07.2026 issued by the State Government (Annexure-9) in its true letter and spirit. 11. Reliance in regard of the aforesaid submission has been placed upon the dictum encapsulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 273/2021 titled Vikash Kumar Vs. Union Public Service Commission & Ors. and the ratio laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.01.2026 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15370/2025 titled Ramprakash Kharlwa Vs. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan & Ors. Further reliance has been placed upon the order passed by the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 4325/2026 titled Santosh Hiraman Lashkare Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 12. Having heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record, and considering the judgments cited at Bar, the following facts emerge: i. That the petitioners possess valid and duly issued disability certificates as per the provisions enshrined under the Act of 2016. ii. It is an admitted and undisputed fact there exist substantial differences in the subsequent medical evaluations carried out by the respondent-employer. iii. That the employment eligibility of the petitioners were adjudicated by the respondents after the constitution of a Medical Board. 13. In the instant matters, the petitioners, who are already in employment, apprehend coercive action on account of the impending re-medical examination, which the petitioners allege is being conducted using different methods, against the applicable [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (10 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] regulations, and contrary to settled norms. At this juncture, it is apposite to reproduce the Circular dated 15.07.2026 issued by the State Government, which reads as under:- " राजस्थान सरकार कार्मि क (क-2) र्मिभाग क ांक-प.17 (6) कार्मि क/क-2/2026-33485 जयपुर र्मिनांकः 15 JUL 2026 परिपत्र 1. स स्त अर्मि. ुख्य सर्मि / प्र ुख शासन सर्मि/ शासन सर्मि 2. स स्त र्मिभागाध्यक्ष ( संभागीय आयुक्त एं र्मिजला कलक्टस सर्मि$) र्मिषयः - र्मिव्यांगजन प्र ाण पत्रों के संबंध ें र्मिशा-र्मिन.श। र्मिव्यांग प्र ाण पत्रों के संबंध ें र्मिर्मिकत्सा एं स्वास्थ्य र्मिभाग / र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिशक्षा र्मिभाग, सा ार्मिजक न्याय एं अर्मिधकारिरा र्मिभाग के साथ $ी कार्मि क र्मिभाग द्वारा स य स य पर र्मिशा- र्मिन.श जारी र्मिकये गये $ैं। ा. उच्च न्यायालय, जयपुर द्वारा एस.बी. र्मिसर्मिल रिरट पीर्मिटशन न. 6021/2026 अ न बना राज्य अन्य ें र्मिनांक 30.04.2026 को र्मिये गये अंरिर आेश की पालना के संबंध ें र्मिव्यांगजन प्र ाण पत्रों ें आ र$ी र्मिसंगर्मि $ेु स ुर्मि र्मिनण य के क्र ें र्मिनम्न र्मिशा-र्मिन.श जारी र्मिकये जाे $ैं:- 1. र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिभाग द्वारा सभी सा संभागीय ुख्यालयों (जयपुर, जोधपुर, अज ेर, बीकानेर, कोटा, उयपुर और भरपुर) के ेर्मि?कल कॉलेजों और उनसे संबद्ध $ॉस्पिCटल के र्मिप्रंसीपल या अधीक्षक (Medical Superintendent) द्वारा र्मिव्यांगा की जां के र्मिलए एक र्मिव्यांगा सत्यापन बो? (Disability Verification Board) गर्मिE र्मिकया जाएगा ( र्मिजस ें अर्मिसस्टेंट प्रोफे सर या उससे उच्च प के ?ॉक्टर $ोंगे)। ये सभी ेर्मि?कल कॉलेज आश्यक ानक उपकरणों (standard equipment) से सुसस्पिI $ोंगे, जो सभी र$ की र्मिव्यांगा का ूल्यांकन करने के र्मिलए आश्यक $ैं, जैसा र्मिक सा ार्मिजक न्याय एं अर्मिधकारिरा र्मिभाग, भार सरकार द्वारा स य- स य पर जारी राजपत्र ें र्मिनर्मि ष्ट र्मिकया हुआ $ै। 2. संबद्ध र्मिव्यांगा को सत्यार्मिप करने के र्मिलए ेर्मि?कल कॉलेज / $ॉस्पिCटल ें आश्यक सभी संबंर्मिध र्मिशेषज्ञ उपलब्ध र$ेंगे। 3. संभागीय ुख्यालय स्तर के ेर्मि?कल कॉलेज/ संबद्ध $ॉस्पिCटल के ऊपर एर्मि?शनल र्मिप्रंर्मिसपल / ेर्मि?कल अधीक्षक की अध्यक्षा ें एक अपीलीय सत्यापन ेर्मि?कल बो? गर्मिE र्मिकया जाएगा। अपीलीय बो? के सस्य प्रारस्पिSक सत्यापन बो? (Initial Verification Board) के सस्य से उच्च प धारिर $ोंगे। भT एजेन्सी और र्मिनयुस्पिक्तका र्मिभाग य$ सुर्मिनर्मिV करेंगे र्मिक आेन करे स य सभी आेकों के पास ैध UDID (Unique Disability Indentification) का? $ो। प्रर्मिक्रयाधीन भT और आगा ी भर्मि यों ें, भT संस्था, र्मिज्ञापन ें य$ आश्यक रूप से अंर्मिक करेगी र्मिक र्मिव्यांगजन श्रेणी के $ आरक्षण के र्मिलए आेन करने ालों ें से स्ताेज सत्यापन के र्मिलए यर्मिन अभ्यर्मिथ यों की र्मिव्यांगा का सत्यापन, संभागीय ुख्यालय पर र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिभाग द्वारा उक्तानुसार गर्मिE बो? द्वारा र्मिकया जाएगा। र्मिव्यागंा सत्यापन ान प्रर्मिल ानक के अनुसार $ी र्मिकया जाएगा। अगर र्मिकसी अभ्यथT ने प$ले से $ी प्र ाण-पत्र [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (11 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] प्राप्त कर र्मिलया $ै, ो भी उस अभ्यथT की पात्रा का र्मिनधा रण ान ें प्रर्मिल ानक के अनुसार जां के बा गर्मिE बो? द्वारा जारी प्र ाण- पत्र के आधार पर र्मिकया जाेगा। अगर कोई र्मिव्यांग अभ्यथT संभागीय ुख्यालय स्तर पर गर्मिE र्मिव्यांगा सत्यापन बो? (Disability Verification Board) द्वारा जां के बा जारी प्र ाण- पत्र से व्यर्मिथ / असंुष्ट $ै, ो $ र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिभाग द्वारा संभागीय ुख्यालय पर यर्मिE अपीलीय बो? ें अपील कर सके गा। 5. कार्मि क र्मिभाग के र्मिन.शों के $ राज्य सरकार ें पू से काय र र्मिव्यांग क ारिरयों / अर्मिधकारिरयों के र्मिलए र्मिकए जा र$े पुनः सत्यापन प्रर्मिक्रया के ौरान, अगर प$ले जारी र्मिकए गए र्मिव्यांगा प्र ाण- पत्र की प्रर्मिशा ें अंर के ा ले पाए जाे $ैं, ो ऐसे क ारिरयों/ अर्मिधकारिरयों की योग्या का र्मिनधा रण राजकीय सेा ें यन के स य प्रर्मिल र्मिव्यांगा ेर्मि?कल ानकों के आधार पर र्मिकया जाेगा। अगर कोई क ारी र्मिव्यांगा के पुनः सत्यापन से असंुष्ट $ै, ो ऐसे क ारी को र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिभाग द्वारा संभाग स्तर पर बनाए गए अपीलीय बो? (Appellate Board) के स क्ष अपील करने का अर्मिधकार $ोगा। उपरोक्त के क्र ें र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिशक्षा था र्मिर्मिकत्सा स्वास्थ्य एं परिरार कल्याण र्मिभाग द्वारा संभागीय ुख्यालयों पर र्मिर्मिकत्सा $ार्मिद्यालय ें र्मिव्यांगजन सत्यापन बो? (Disability Verification Board) एं अपीलीय बो? (Appellate Board) का गEन र्मिकया जायेगा। र्मिर्मिकत्सा र्मिशक्षा था र्मिर्मिकत्सा स्वास्थ्य एं परिरार कल्याण र्मिभाग द्वारा अर्मिधक Cष्टा के र्मिलए आश्यक $ोने पर र्मिस्तृ र्मिशा- र्मिन.श पृथक् से जारी र्मिकये जाेंगें। ( अ ना र्मिसं$) शासन सर्मि" 14. Upon a careful analysis of the afore-quoted circular, this Court is of the view that the said circular is a self-sustaining mechanism that comprehensively addresses the apprehensions raised by the petitioners. Moreover, at the time of the impending medical evaluation, the petitioners are well within their rights to submit their contentions, defenses, or point out any specific factors, such as age, methodology, etc., applicable to them, which the experts carrying out the said evaluation may consider before concluding the medical evaluation. 15. Taking into consideration the explicit appellate mechanism provided within the said circular, this Court is of the view that the [2026:RJ-JP:33051] (12 of 12) [CW-15154/2026] proposed further evaluation may be carried out by the respondents qua the present petitioners and other similarly situated persons. 16. Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present bunch of petitions with direction to the respondents that the requisite medical evaluation of the petitioners shall be carried out at the specified centers, strictly in accordance with the Circular dated 15.07.2026, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 17. The respondents shall ensure that appropriate comfort and consideration is afforded to the petitioners during the said process in light of the guidelines framed qua the afore-quoted circular. 18. It is also clarified that any evaluation carried out in pursuance of earlier circulars shall also be governed by the fate and mechanism of the Circular dated 15.07.2026. 19. To facilitate the said process, the petitioners are at liberty to submit detailed representation(s) before the respective appointing authorities within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 20. To protect the interests of the petitioners during the interregnum, it is directed that for the aforesaid period of 30 days, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners. 21. Accordingly, the present batch of petitions stand disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/s-198-202, 210-213 & 222