[2026:RJ-JP:17849] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2223/2026 Ramji Lal Jat S/o Bhagwan Sahay Jat, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Ward No. 24, Rampura Road, Shahpura, Peli Wali Dani, Shahpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan through Secretary, Education Department, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur; 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan); 3. Joint Director, School Education, Jaipur Sambhag, Jaipur; 4. The District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Jaipur; 5. The District Secondary Education Officer, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Punit Singhvi with Ms. Shraddha Mehta Ms. Suhani Singh Mr. Naman Dadhich Mr. Ishan Verma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG with Ms. Pooja Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Order 28/04/2026 1. Both the counsels are in agreement that the issue involved in the present case is no more res integra as the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has decided the similar issue in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12258/2023, titled as ‘Usha Soni Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.’, decided on 18.07.2024. The relevant paras of the same are reproduced hereinunder:- [2026:RJ-JP:17849] (2 of 3) [CW-2223/2026] “4. Looking to the fact that the controversy involved in this petition has been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Praveen Chand Jain (supra) with the aforesaid directions:- “Learned counsel for the respondent/s could not justify the action of the respondents, inasmuch as, Circular dated 28.07.2003 clarified that if employee has been appointed on regular basis on probation then he would be entitled for salary of summer vacation even if appointment is after 31st December. No justification is given by the respondents for denial of benefit of increment from January other than erroneously correlating it with the benefit of selection scale and thereby, shifting it by 48 days. I find the action of respondents is illegal, inasmuch as, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of salary of summer vacation as he is covered by the Circular. The petitioner should be given increment from the date of joining and not by shifting it to the month of March. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and consequential benefit would be given to the petitioner as referred above. He would be entitled to other benefits based on appointment order dated 22.01.1987 and his joining on 29.01.1987, thus benefit of selection scale would also be determined accordingly.” 5. The instant writ petition stands disposed of in the light of aforesaid directions issued in the case of Praveen Chand Jain (supra).” 2. In view of the above fact, as both the counsels are in agreement that the issue is covered by the judgment/order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Usha [2026:RJ-JP:17849] (3 of 3) [CW-2223/2026] Soni (supra), the present writ petition is allowed. The order passed in the case of Usha Soni (supra) shall apply mutatis mutandis in the present case also. 3. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J PARSHANT /330