[2026:RJ-JP:139] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17586/2025 Rajendra Kumar Meena Son Of Shri Nathu Lal Meena, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of Jodla Power House, Harmada, Sikar Road , Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its, Secretary, Department Of Finance (Revenue), Govt. Secretriat, Jaipur, Rajasthan 2. Joint Secretary, Department Of Finance (Revenue), Govt. Secretriat, Jaipur, Rajasthan 3. Director, Dept. Of Treasuries And Accounts, Vitta Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan 4. Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer 5. Ashok Kumar Meena, Sr. No. 90 (Impugned Order Dated 19.09.2025) Through Director, Deptt. Of Treasuries And Accounts, Vitta Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan 6. Rakesh Kumar Meena, Sr. No. 139 (Impugned Order Dated 19.09.2025) Through Director, Deptt. Of Treasuries And Accounts, Vitta Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitesh Kumar Garg For Respondent(s) : Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG Ms. Praveshika Singh with Mr. Lokesh Sharma for Mr. V.D. Gathala, AGC Mr. Aditya Godara for Mr. Govind Gupta for Mr. M.F. Baig HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 06/01/2026 1. The present petition is filed seeking the following relief: “1. By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 19.09.2025 (Annexure-7) to the extent of not selecting/promoting the petitioner and [2026:RJ-JP:139] (2 of 3) [CW-17586/2025] selecting/promoting respondent no.5 and 6 junior persons than petitioner be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside. 2. By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, the respondents be directed to select the petitioner in the junior scale of Rajasthan Accounts Services at Sr. No.90 before respondent no.5 in the order dated 19.09.2025 against the vacancies of 2023-24 in accordance with his seniority and eligibility, with all consequential benefits, including pay fixation, seniority, and arrears. 3. By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction, the non-promotion of the petitioner in the Junior Scale of Rajasthan Accounts Services be declared as arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 4. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. 5. Cost of the petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the record, it is noted that the petitioner would fall under the definition of ‘government servant’, as prescribed under Section 2(c) of Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act 1976 (for short “Act of 1976”), and the lis in question is also covered under the definition of ‘service matters’, as prescribed under Section 2(f) of the Act of 1976, which has been given a wide meaning by Division Bench of this Court in Jahangir Ali Khan vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (DBSAW No. 662/2022; decided on 25.05.2022). 3. The exercise of writ jurisdiction is fundamentally discretionary in nature. The limitations placed on Court's decision to exercise or refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction are self- imposed. Although learned counsel for the petitioner rightly contends that existence of an alternate remedy, whether adequate [2026:RJ-JP:139] (3 of 3) [CW-17586/2025] or not, does not create an absolute bar on maintainability of writ petition nor does it alter the fundamentally discretionary nature of writ jurisdiction, but it remains a discretion nonetheless. Therefore, since an alternate and efficacious remedy is available to the petitioners, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is not inclined to exercise the extra-ordinary jurisdiction. 4. The petitioner is granted liberty to approach the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for short “RAT”) for redressal of his/her grievance. If the petitioner files appropriate petition before the RAT within a period of 15 days, the RAT shall adjudicate the same on merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/38