Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15403 (RAJ)

DR. AKSHAT SAXENA S/O SHALENDRA SAXENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/508/2026 · 2026-01-13

Sameer Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:1348] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 508/2026 Dr. Akshat Saxena S/o Shalendra Saxena, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Girraj Colony, Near Rajakhera Bypass, Dholpur-328001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Of Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur. 2. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur. 3. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical, Health And Family Welfare Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur. 4. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Dholpur. 5. The Block Chief Medical And Health Officer, Rajakhera, Dholpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Saxena Ms. Neha Swami For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 13/01/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was rendering services as UTB (Urgent Temporary Basis) - Medical Officers, howsoever on account of regular appointments qua the Medical Officers, his services are ended. It is submitted that inspite of regular appointments, there are numerous vacancies available in the medical field. Learned counsel has also relied upon the ratio encapsulated in S.B. Civil Writ [2026:RJ-JP:1348] (2 of 2) [CW-508/2026] Petition No.20410/2025 titled Dr. Shreeram Jhajhara & Ors. Versus The State of Rajasthan & Ors. It is submitted that the ratio of said judgment be considered while adjudicating the representation filed by the petitioner before the respective CMHO and if there is any vacancy, they may be considered sympathetically. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondents is unable to refute that the judgment of Dr. Shreeram Jhajhara (Supra) are not appealed. It is submitted that if representation is filed, the same will be dealt with in the ratio as relied above. 3. In light of the said submissions, the present writ petition is disposed of. 4. It is expected from the respective CMHO that appropriate orders be passed within a period of 30 days upon filing of the representation in consonance with the afore-relied ratios. 5. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed. (SAMEER JAIN),J DEEPAK/23