[2026:RJ-JP:558] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 145/2026 1. Rajendra Prasad S/o Shri Ramdev, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Vill. Nangal Bavla, Tehsil Mundawar, Thana Tatarpur, District Khairthal Tijara, Raj. Head Constable Driver Belt No. 1531. 2. Sukyaram S/o Shri Jhabaru Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Gram Hajipur, Post Khudiyana, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar, Raj. Constable Driver Belt No. 1509 3. Abdul Gani S/o Shri Ameen Khan, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Vijaypur, Police Thana, Vijay Mandir, Tehsil And District Alwar Raj. Constable Driver Belt No. 2356. 4. Sahabudeen Khan S/o Shri Ishab Khan, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Gram Dohali, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar Raj. Constable Driver. Belt No. 1554 5. Harendra Singh S/o Shri Heera Lal, R/o Gram Reta, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar, Raj. Constable Driver Belt No. 1908 6. Pappu Lal S/o Shri Mishri Lal, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Gram Jahagirpura, Post Pichumber, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg Bharatpur, Raj. Constable Driver Belt No. 519 7. Balram Meena S/o Shri Govind Sahay Meena, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Gram Post Dholan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar, Constable Driver Belt No. 1526 8. Budh Ram S/o Shri Panna Lal, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Gram Khedali, Chandravat, Post Nangal, Rawanjadi, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar, Raj. Constable Driver Belt No. 1518 9. Haneeph Khan S/o Shri Hurmat Khan, Aged About 49 Years, R/o T-3-916 Apna Ghar Shalimar, Vistar, Alwar, Raj. Constable Driver Belt No. 1559 ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Department Of Home, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. Financial Advisor, Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Tonk [2026:RJ-JP:558] (2 of 3) [CW-145/2026] Road, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. The Superintendent Of Police Alwar, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Paramanand Paliwal Mr. Ghanshyam Maharda For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 08/01/2026 1. The present petition is filed seeking the following relief: “1. By an appropriate writ order and direction of mandamus or in the nature thereof thereby the respondents may kindly be directed to grant second selection grade on completion of 18 years of service as per the pay of post of Assistant Sub Inspector of police and further directed to release in favour of petitioners on account of grant of second selection grade the pay of the post of Sub Inspector with all consequential benefit viz. pay fixation on the post of Sub Inspector, arrears of salary further promotion etc. in the larger interest of justice. 2. Issue any other writ order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners. 3. Cost of the writ petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioners.” 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and upon perusal of the record, it is noted that the petitioners 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 [2026:RJ-JP:558] (3 of 3) [CW-145/2026] 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 petitioners rightly contends that existence of an alternate remedy, whether adequate 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 petitioners are granted liberty to approach the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for short “RAT”) for redressal of his/her grievance. If the petitioners 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 three months. 5. Needless to say, no prejudice to be caused to either sides based on any observations made hereinabove. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/34