[2026:RJ-JP:17932] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7099/2026 Anju Sirohi D/o Shri Nihal Singh, aged about 45 years, resident of B-56, New Civil Lines, Near Saras Hotel, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, presently working as Vice Principal at P.M. Shri Shri Jagannath Pahadiya, Government Senior Secondary School, Bhusawar (Bharatpur). (Employee ID-RJBP201607032470) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan through Director Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner. 2. District Education Officer, (Headquarter), Secondary Education, Bharatpur (Rajasthan) 3. Principal, P.M. Shri Shri Jagannath Pahadiya, Government Senior Secondary School, Bhusawar (Bharatpur), Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurodh Chaturvedi on behalf of Mr. D.G. Chaturvedi. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devansh Sharma. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN Order 28/04/2026 1. At the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the present writ petition has been taken up and heard for final disposal at the admission stage. 2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the respondents making endorsement of “Be Cautious” in future in the service book of the petitioner for the session 2024- 2025. 3. The case of the petitioner is that she is working as Lecturer in the subject of Mathematics and she was also given additional charge of Physics subject to teach the 12th Standard. According to the contents of the show cause notice, the pass percentage of the Physics subject was 56.52% and, therefore, a show cause notice [2026:RJ-JP:17932] (2 of 3) [CW-7099/2026] was issued to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner failed to secure satisfactory percentage as is required under the departmental standards. Based on the show cause notice, a reply was submitted by the petitioner. The respondents having considered the reply, dropped the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner; however, an entry was made in her service book of “Be Cautious” in future. The apprehension of the petitioner is that making of such an entry is contrary to the fact that the departmental proceedings were dropped, on which basis, initially the proceedings were drawn. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the petitioner is meeting with the criteria of 35% of pass percentage in the additional charge subject, i.e. Physics, as contemplated in the Circular. 4. The Circular dated 27.05.2025 requires 35% of pass percentage in respect of the Lecturers having additional charge relating to one additional subject. However, the petitioner has secured satisfactory pass percentage in respect of the additional subject, i.e. Physics as per Circular. According to the show cause notice, the percentage of students passed in Physics was 56.52% which is over and above the requirement of the Circular. In the said background, the departmental proceedings were dropped, however, such an action of recording an endorsement of “Be Cautious” in future in the service book of the petitioner for the session 2024-2025 has been done by the respondents. 5. This Court having gone through the said Circular found that the Circular requires 35% pass percentage of Class 12th in the additionally charged subject. In the present case, the petitioner is [2026:RJ-JP:17932] (3 of 3) [CW-7099/2026] a Lecturer of Mathematics; however, she was given additional charge of Physics subject to teach the students of 12th Standard. The Circular requires only 35% of the pass percentage if the Lecturer is teaching the subject as an additional subject. This means the requirement of the circular has fully been complied with by the petitioner. However, an entry to the effect of “Be Cautious” in future was made in the service book of the petitioner for the session 2024-2025. Though the words are used in different forms, they are nothing but a species of Censure. On account of unnecessary endorsement made by the concerned Authority, the petitioner was required to be driven to this Court by spending her time and money. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow the writ petition with an exemplary cost. 6. In the result, the present writ petition is allowed with a cost of Rs. 20,000/-. Consequently, the impugned entry of “Be Cautious” in future made in the service book of the petitioner for the session 2024-2025 is quashed and expunged and necessary remark regarding quashment of the entry be made against such column, in the service book of the petitioner. The amount of cost shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of one month and the liberty is given to the respondents to recover the amount of cost from the concerned Officer, after giving him an appropriate notice. (MUNNURI LAXMAN),J 13-Mohan/-