Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6718 (RAJ)

RAVINDRA SINGH S/O SHRI HARI SINGH v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/854/2026 · 2026-03-12

Ashok Kumar Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:10368] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 854/2026 1. Ravindra Singh S/o Shri Hari Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Hadahedi, Sihali Khurd, District Kherthal-Tijara (Rajasthan). 2. Sudhir Kumar Rodha S/o Shri Chajuram Rodha, R/o Ward No. 17 Shyam Nagar, Behror, District Kherthal-Tijara (Rajasthan). 3. Anil Kumar S/o Shri Prabatilal, R/o Near Vijay Mandir, Town Dahara, District Kherthal-Tijara (Rajasthan). 4. Deepak Kumar S/o Shri Radheyshyam, R/o Village Beejwad Chauhan, Tehsil Mundawar, District Kherthal- Tijara (Rajasthan) 5. Vijay Pal S/o Shri Dharampal, R/o Kaluka Hathoondi, Tehsil Mundawar, Distrit Kherthal-Tijara (Rajasthan). ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department , Government Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director, (Public Health) Medical And Health Service, Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur. 3. Rajasthan Medical Service Corporation Department, Through Its Chairman/ Managing Director, Gandhi Block, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. 4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Kherthal-Tijara, District Kherthal-Tijara. 5. Block Chief Medical And Health Officer, Mundawar, District Kherthal-Tijara. 6. Medical Officer Incharaj, Phc Sihali Kala, District Kherthal- Tijara. 7. Medical Officer Incharaj, Phc Chandpur, District Kherthal- Tijara. 8. Medical Officer Incharaj, Phc Jindoli, District Kherthal- Tijara. 9. Medical Officer Incharaj, Phc Bijwad Chauhan, District Kherthal-Tijara. [2026:RJ-JP:10368] (2 of 3) [CW-854/2026] 10. Medical Officer Incharaj, Phc Mundawar, District Kherthal- Tijara. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rahul Verma for Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 12/03/2026 1. Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioners with following prayer: “i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the impugned Order dated 26.06.2025 issued by the respondent no.5 may kindly be quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the Petitioners continuously on their respective post their respective place of posting without replacing them from other at contractual employee till the appointment of regular employee. iii) Any other order which this Hon'ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the Petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioners while referring and relying upon judgment dated 04.02.2025 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1848/2025 titled as “Satish Kumar Verma & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. submits that the controversy and the issue raised herein is already settled by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court (on the basis of ratio laid down in case of Shruti Moyal & Ors. Vs. [2026:RJ-JP:10368] (3 of 3) [CW-854/2026] The State of Rajasthan and Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12243/2024 dated 30.07.2024). He further submitted that instant writ petition be disposed of in accordance with aforesaid order. 3. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioners and considering the limited prayer made by him, the instant petition stands disposed of with directions to the respondents to ascertain the number of vacancies available with them and in case, there is a desire to take the services of the petitioners on any post available, the petitioners may be adjusted or accommodated to serve against the vacant post till the regularly selected candidate is made available by the department. 4. It is made clear that in case, it is found that the petitioners are not discharging the duties satisfactorily, the respondents would be at liberty to discharge them from employment. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /44