[2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR/JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1408/2023 Poonam Soni @ Poonam Upadhyay D/o Shri Dhanpal, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 43, Satyam Nagar, Banswara, District Banswara, School Lecturer In Home Science. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. 3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer Through Its Chairman. 4. Sarvesh Pandey S/o Shri Sant Kumar Pandey, Resident Of Sneh Kunj, Opposite Modern Public School, Ward No. 01, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 5. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Department Of Personnel, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 167/2023 1. Harihar Rajpurohit S/o Shri Om Prakash Purohit, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Near Jail Well, Hanuman Gali, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 2. Anjali Sharma D/o Shri Shanker Lal Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o B-301, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 3. Bharti Meena D/o Shri Raghuvir Meena, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Saya Photo Studio, Khanpur, Dist. Jhalawar, Rajasthan. 4. Chanakya Wagdiya S/o Shri Jagdish Wagdiya, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Daduka, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara, Rajasthan. 5. Devendra Kumar S/o Shri Ramnath Singh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o V.P.O. Pachlangi, Tehsil Udaipurwati, Dist. Jhujhunu, Rajasthan. 6. Divya Kumari D/o Shri Ram Naresh Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 63A, Pratap Nagar Chauraha, Muralipura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 7. Gurjinder Singh Brar S/o Shri Labh Singh Brar, Aged About 41 Years, R/o V.p.o. Mohanpura, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 8. Kavita Sharma D/o Shri Dev Dutt Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 467 Kailashpuri, Bikaner, Rajasthan. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (2 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 9. Kuldeep Gupta S/o Shri Ram Gopal Gupta, Aged About 44 Years, R/o H.no. 54, Panchawati Colony, Behind Medical Center, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 10. Kusum Suthar D/o Shri Shanker Lal Suthar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 54, Shreeji Nagar, Sheoganj, Sirohi, Rajasthan. 11. Madhu Khatri D/o Shri Ram Lal Khatri, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Khatrion Ka Nichla Vas, Barmer, Rajasthan. 12. Manish Kumar Pachauri S/o Shri Damodar Dayal Pachauri, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Sher Pada, Bari, Tehsil Bari, Dist. Dholpur, Rajasthan. 13. Meenu Rathore D/o Shri Roop Singh Rathore, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 130, Ghanshyam Vihar A, Vaishali Marg West, Panchawala, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 14. Prahlad Singh S/o Shri Mohar Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o V.p.o. Kanau, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 15. Rakesh Kumar Jangir S/o Shri Amilal Jangir, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No. 03, V.p.o. Bhatiwar, Dist- Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 16. Ravindra Singh Rathore S/o Shri Narpat Singh Rathore, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 274 Kailashpuri, Lalgarh, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 17. Ritu D/o Shri Rajveer Singh Parmar, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Anand Nagar, Sepau Road, Dholpur, Rajasthan. 18. Sameer Sharma S/o Shri Sajjan Kumar Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o V.p.o. Derwala, Via-Nua, Tehsil- Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 19. Santosh Jangir S/o Shri Sita Ram Jangir, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Near Trimurti Mandir, Manaksar Road, Suratgarh, Dist. Shri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 20. Santosh D/o Shri Ghinsa Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Shahid Bhagat Singh Colony, Tilaknagar, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 21. Sanwar Mal Jangid S/o Shri Ram Singh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Jatto Ka Mohalla, Post Surajgarh, Tehsil Surajgarh, Dist- Jhunjhunu, Rajadthan. 22. Satya Narayan Sharma S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, Aged About 44 Years, R/o V.p.o. Mundra, Tehsil Sujangarh, Dist Churu, Rajasthan. 23. Savita Dhikwal D/o Shri Bishan Dayal Dhikwal, Aged About 36 Years, R/o C-150, Kanta Khaturiya Colony, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 24. Shashank Patidar S/o Shri Kamalashanker, Aged About 32 Years, R/o V.p.o. Jogpur,thesil Galiyakot, Dist. Dungerpur, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (3 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Rajasthan. 25. Shilpa Meena D/o Hemraj Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vikas Nagar, Bundi, Rajasthan. 26. Tanesh Kumar S/o Shri Sukhdev Prasad, Aged About 38 Years, R/o V.p.o. Mojawas, Via-Mandawa, Dist.- Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 27. Urmila D/o Shri Hariram Verma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ward No. 29, Jamat, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhanu, Rajasthan. 28. Udai Bhanu Singh S/o Shri Rameshwar Prajapati, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Plot No.-122, Anand Nagar Colony, Saipau Road, Dholpur, Rajasthan ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. 3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission (Rpsc), Ajmer Through Its Chairman. 4. Akin Middha S/o Shri Krishan Lal Middha, R/o Ward No. 43, White House Road, Near Kaushik Chikitsalaya, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 5. Gayatri D/o Shri Krishan Lal Sharma, R/o Kheteshwar Basti, Near Modi Kuwan, Gangashahar, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma, Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School, Shri Dungargarh, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 7. Sunita Suthar D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o Ward No. 05, Vpo-Ramgarh, Tehsil Nohar, Dist Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 8. Saroj Pencia D/o Shri Kernel Singh, R/o Ward No. 33, Gurudwara Road, Suratgarh, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 9. Sahab Ram S/o Shri Om Prakash, Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Shyoratada, Bhadara, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 10. Isha Gupta D/o Shri Tarsem Lal, R/o Ward No. 11, Khrniya Road, Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 11. Sarvesh Pandey S/o Shri Sant Kumar Pandey, R/o Sneh Kunj, Opposite Modern Public School, Ward No. 01, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 246/2023 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (4 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 1. Pawan Kumar S/o Shri Amar Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 6, Behind Stadium Ground, Near Government College, Suratgarh, Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan). 2. Abhishek Anand S/o Shri Baldev Joshi, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Brahmin, R/o Ward No. 04, Pareek Mohalla, Village Sahva, Tehsil Taranagar, Churu, Rajasthan 3. Deepak Sarswat S/o Shri Awadh Kumar Sarswat, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Karni Colony, Nagaur, Rajasthan 4. Dr. Anuj Nuwal D/o Shri Satya Narayan Nuwal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o C-20, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 5. Jaya Poonia D/o Shri Mahaveer Singh, Aged About 30 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Siddharth Nagar, Near Jawahar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 6. Manish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Babu Lal Sharma, Aged About 37 Years, R/o 1-B-4, Housing Board, Kota, Rajasthan. 7. Minakshi Sharma D/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Chak 55 Np, Nanuwala, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan 8. Monika D/o Shri Dalveer Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vpo Gagarwas, Block Rajgarh, District Churu, Rajasthan. 9. Mukesh Kumar S/o Shri Bhagmal Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No.3, Near Old State Bank, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 10. Mukesh Sundesha S/o Shri Babulal Sundesha, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ambelvav Bera, Tekarawas Bhinmal, District Jalore, Rajasthan. 11. Neha Maheshwari D/o Shri Ramgopal Maheshwari, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 412/1, Ram Laxman Colony, Ward No.7, Near Railway Station, Nawa City, Nagaur, Rajasthan. 12. Rajendra Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Babu Lal Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 1-B-4, Housing Board, Kunhari, Kota, Rajasthan. 13. Rohit Arora S/o Shri Praveen Kumar Arora, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Adarsh Colony, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 14. Samir Bhatt S/o Shri Dinesh Chandra Bhatt, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vpo-Khadagada, Tehsil-Sagwara,dist.- Dungarpur Rajasthan. 15. Dr. Shalini Agarwal D/o Shri Rajendra Prasad Goyal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o C-363, Azad Nagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (5 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. 3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer Through Its Chairman. 4. Akin Middha S/o Shri Krishan Lal Middha, R/o Ward No. 43, White House Road, Near Kaushik Chikitsalaya, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 5. Gayatri D/o Shri Krishan Lal Sharma, R/o Kheteshwar Basti, Near Modi Kuwan, Gangashahar, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma, R/o Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School, Shri Dungargarh, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 7. Sunita Suthar D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o Ward No. 05, Vpo-Ramgarh, Tehsil Nohar, Dist Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 8. Saroj Pencia D/o Shri Kernel Singh, R/o Ward No. 33, Gurudwara Road, Suratgarh, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 9. Sahab Ram S/o Shri Om Prakash, R/o Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Shyoratada, Bhadara, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 10. Isha Gupta D/o Shri Tarsem Lal, R/o Ward No. 11, Khrniya Road, Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 11. Sarvesh Pandey S/o Shri Sant Kumar Pandey, R/o Sneh Kunj, Opposite Modern Public School, Ward No. 01, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. ----Respondents D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 461/2023 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Education, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director, Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Ajay Kumar Rohila S/o Shri Devkinandan, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 10, Athuna Bass, Sardarshahar, District Churu At Present Working At Gsss Phogan Churu (Raj.). 2. Anand Patel S/o Bhura Ram Choudhary, Aged About 40 Years, R/o V/p Thobau, Tehsil Bhinmal, District Jalore At [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (6 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Poonasa, Jalore (Raj.). 3. Anuj Kumar S/o Ram Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 2/135, New Housing Board, Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar At Present Working At Suratgarh District Sriganganagar (Raj.) 4. Arun Kumar Swami S/o Omprakash Swami, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village And Post Badet, Via Tamkor, Tehsil Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Mggs, Ghardana, Khurd, Buhana, Jhunjhunu (Raj.). 5. Arun Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Brahma Singh Choudhary, Aged About 46 Years, R/o D-24, Majisaka Bas, Government Press At Present Working At Directorate Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.). 6. Arvind Kumar Dhilan S/o Prakash Chand Dhilan, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Dhaniguman Singh, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar At Present Working At Cbeo Officer Neemkathana, District Sikar (Raj.) 7. Ashok Kumar S/o Shrawan Kumar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 03, Science Park Road, Nawalgarh, Dist. Jhunjhunu. At Present Gsss Jakhar 8. Ashok Kumar S/o Hema Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Asalsar, Post Dhankoli, Tehsil Didwana, District Nagaur At Present Working At Gsss Ladariya, Nagaur. 9. Bachchu Singh S/o Teja Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Opposite Numaish Ground Heeradas Colony, Bharatpur At Present Working At Gsss Ibrahimpur, Tehsil Rupwas, Bharatpur. 10. Balveer S/o Sultan Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Sriganganagar At Present Working At Gsss, Betwasia, District Jodhpur (Raj.). 11. Bheem Singh S/o Ramjivan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Bhatpura, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Sahadoli, Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.). 12. Bhupesh Rinwa S/o Prithvi Raj Rinwa, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 19, Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh At Present Working At Gsss, Bhangarh, District Hanumangarh (Raj.). 13. Bulaki Khan S/o Nathu Khan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Mdv Colony Road, Vivekbalniketan School Kesamne, Bikaner At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Jhajhu, Kolayat, Bikaner (Raj.). 14. Chandra Prakash S/o Narpat Singh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Sankarana, District Jalore At Present Working At Gsss, Ahore, District Jalore (Raj.). [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (7 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 15. Chauhal Singh S/o Ajeet Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Jaicholi, Post Par, Tehsil Uchain, District Bharatpur At Present Working At Gsss, Pipla, District Bharatpur (Raj.). 16. Dayanand Giree S/o Mukh Ram Giree, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Vpo Bhojasar, Chhota, Tehsil Sardarshahar, District Churu At Present Gsss Pulasar. 17. Deep Chand S/o Sharvan Kumar, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Niradhanu, Tehsil Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Gsss, Shobhasar. 18. Dinesh Kumar Jangir S/o Ram Niwasjangir, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vpo Dabla, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar At Present Working At Mahatma Gandhi Govt. School Chhaja Ki Nangalsikar. 19. Dinesh Kumar Dhaker S/o Narayan Laldhaker, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Jaisinghpura, Tehsil Barisadri, District Chittorgarh At Present Working At Svgms Barisadrichittaurgarh (Raj.). 20. Dinesh Kumar Joshi S/o Bhawani Shankar Ji, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Bapunagar, Senthi, Chittorgarh, At Present Working At Gsss Narela. 21. Goverdhan S/o Satyanarayan, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Pugal Road Banglanagar, At Present Working At Gsss Narela. 22. Himanshu Dadhich S/o Raghunathdadhich, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Inside Vishwakarma Gate, Near Ram Mandir, Bikaner At Present Working At Ggsss M.d. Marg, Bikaner. 23. Himanshu Jani S/o Yogesh Chandra, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Brahmpuribarisadri At Present Working At Swami Vivekanandgoverment Model School, Bhadesar. 24. Hukam Chand Koli S/o Devi Lalkoli, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 33, Koliwara, Surajpole, Teh- Girwa, Udaipur At Present Working At Emrs Rishabhdev Udaipur. 25. Jagdish Kumar S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village- Dantiwas, Teh- Bhinmal, District- Jalore At Present Working At G.s.s.s. Kodka, Jalore. 26. Jitendra Singh S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Vpo- Niradhanu, Th- Malsisar, Dist- Jhunjhunu. Gsss Chandwa, Jhunjhunu. 27. Kailash Charan S/o Ramkishancharan, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Bhadur Sing Colony, Sardarshahar, Dist. Churu At Present Working At Gsss Bhanipura. 28. Kamal Kuamr Ojha S/o Vijay Shankar, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Goshala Bass, Sardarshahar At Present Working At G.s.s.s. School, Sardarshahar. Dist. Churu. 29. Kavita Atal S/o Seeta Ram Jatav, Aged About 34 Years, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (8 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] R/o E-93, Ambedkar Nagar, Alwar At Present Working At G.s.s.s. School, Akbarpur, Alwar. 30. Kewa Ram S/o Chhagana Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Vp Narta Tehsil Bhinmal, District Jalore At Present Working At Adpc Smsa, Jalore (Raj.). 31. Krishna Kumar Meena S/o Guman Ram Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Neengor, Post Dwarikpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur At Present Working At Gsss, Bhainslanapaota, Jaipur (Raj.). 32. Kulveer Singh S/o Balvinder Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ward No. 12, Rawlamandi, Sriganganagar At Present Working At Gsss Naharanwali. 33. Laxmi Bai Sharma D/o Gopallal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Newai, Dist. Tonk. At Present Working At Gsss Sirohi. 34. Lichhaman Ram S/o Roopa Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vpo Hudas, Tehsil Ladnu, District Nagaur At Present Working At Gsss, Dholiyaladnu, District Nagaur. 35. Lokesh Kumar Meena S/o Ram Singh Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Ronsi, Tehsil Nadoti, District Karauli At Present Working At Emrs Ranoli, Block Todabhim, District Karauli. 36. Mahipal Singh Ashiya S/o Om Prakash, Aged About 32 Years, R/o E-103, Rameshwar Nagar Jodhpur At Present Working At Gsss Luni, Jodhpur. 37. Mangilal Godara S/o Premaramgodara, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Nathusar Bass, Bikaner At Present Working At Govt. Sadul Sr. Sec. School, Bikaner. 38. Manish Swami S/o Kamal Swami, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Near Choudhary Well Wad No. 39 At Present Working At Gasss Sardarshahar. 39. Manit Kumar Meena S/o Hawa Singh Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Hamzapur, Dugherabehror, Alwar At Present Working At Gsss, Rasgan. 40. Manjeet Kumar S/o Nar Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Hatpaluramdhan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu, At Present Working At Gsss Bhojan. 41. Manoj Kumar Sharma S/o Mohan Lal Sharma, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Shahpura, District Bhilwara, At Present Working At Gangrarchittorgarh. 42. Manisha Yadav S/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 607 Moh. Allaahiran Near Gopinathmandirpragpura, Paota Jaipur At Present Working At Sardar Govt. Sr. Sec. School Kotputli, Jaipur. 43. Monalisa D/o Nagendra Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o B-284, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh, Bikaner At Present Gsss [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (9 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Gajner, Bikaner. 44. Monika Chanwariya D/o Late Shri Kailashchanwariya, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Haxuri Gate Paharganj, Near Devijis Temple Ward No. 10, Alwar At Present Working At Gsss Akbarpur. 45. Monika Kumari D/o Raj Kimar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer At Present Gsss Srinagar, Ajmer. 46. Moti Ram S/o Magha Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Daukiyon Ki Dhani, Bijrad, Teh. Chohtan District Barmer At Present Gsss, Sarnoopanjibarmer. 47. Mukesh Kumar S/o Hoshiyar Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Cheemaka Bas, Post Berla, Tehsil Surajgarh, Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Shyampura, Mainana, Jhunjhunu. 48. Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Hanuman Prasad, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bansuralwar At Present Working At Gsss Guntashahpura, Alwar. 49. Narendra Chahar S/o Khemchandchahar, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Vop Abusar, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Ladusar, Jhunjhunu. 50. Naveen Kumar S/o Raj Kishore, Aged About 43 Years, R/o D19, Karni Nagar Lalgarh, Bikaner At Present Working At Gsss, Udairamsar, Bikaner. 51. Naresh Kumar S/o Mangal Chand, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Vpo Chanana, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Mggs Chanana, District Jhunjhunu. 52. Neelkanth Choudhary S/o Hari Ram Choudhary, Aged About 40 Years, R/o B-20, Hanuman Bagh, Nagaur At Present Working At Gsss Firod, Nagaur. 53. Neelkant Sharma S/o Ram Niwas Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vpo Bhainsali, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu At Present Working At Shaheedrajkumar Gsss Bhainsalichuru. 54. Nitesh Kumar S/o Uresh Kumar, Aged About 40 Years, R/o House No. 23/573, Chaupasani Housing Board, Jodhpur At Present Working At Gsss, Baori, Jodhpur. 55. Nitesh Kumar S/o Ranjeet Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No. 05, Sooraj Colony Angasar Road, Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Diet Jhunjhunu. 56. Nutan Kumar S/o Umed Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vpo Jatbehror, Alwar At Present Working At Ggsss, Sanoli, Alwar. 57. Om Prakash Godara S/o Shera Ram Godara, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Mingsaria, Tehsil Sridungargarh, Bikaner At Present Upani. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (10 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 58. Onkar Jangir S/o Ramdassjangir, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Sangaria, District Hanumangarh At Present Working At Gsss Malarampura, Sangariya, District Hanumangarh. 59. Parshotam Lal S/o Parmeshwarlal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Nakarasarchuru, At Present Working At Gsss Ranasarjaitasar. 60. Pooja Vaishnav D/o Mithulalvaishnav, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Chittorgarh At Present Working At Hass Gangrar. 61. Prashant Kumar Khandelwal S/o Chander Kant Gupta, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 48, Moti Nagar Vistar, Alwar At Present Working At Gsss Karnikot Block Mundawar, District Alwar. 62. Pratibha Saraf D/o Karan Singh Saraf, Aged About 41 Years, R/o C-19, Dr. R.k. Colony, Bhilwara At Present Working At Rooplalsomani Govt. Sr. Secondary School Bhagawanpura, Bhilwara. 63. Prem Singh Rathore S/o Gajraj Singh Rathore, Aged About 37 Years, R/o House No. 112 At Present Working At Gsss Banashridungargarh, Bikaner. 64. Priyanka Gupta, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Barodameo, District Alwar At Present Working At Ggsss, Barodameo, Alwar. 65. Puneet Kumar Budania S/o Rajendra Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Ghoriwarakalan, Via Mukundtarah, Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Gsss Bhojnagar. 66. Raghuveer Singh Nehra S/o Dana Ram Nehra, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Biramsar, Ratangarh, Churu At Present Working At Gsss Biramsar, Ratangarh, District Churu. 67. Raish Mohammed S/o Ayub Mohammed, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Pratap Colony, Deoli, Tehsil Deoli, District Tonk At Present Working At Gsss, Ghatiyali, Ajmer. 68. Rajesh Jatav S/o Lala Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Outside Delhi Gate, Near Laldas Temple, Alwar At Present Working At Gsss, Bagar Rajput, Alwar. 69. Rajulal Yadav S/o Laxmanyadav, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Bichpuri, Post Bamor, Tehsil And District Tonk At Present Working At Gsss Kohinatmam, Tonk. 70. Rakesh Kumar S/o Purabhu Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Patanmewan, Tehsil Kishangarh Bas, District Alwar At Present Working At Gsss, Kishangarh Bas, Alwar. 71. Rakesh Kumar S/o Ram Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Lalgarhiya, P.o. Birmana, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar At Present Working At Girls Sss, Makkasar, Hanumangarh. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (11 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 72. Ramji Lal Ranga S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Khuddi, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu, At Present Working At Gsss Ghanau. 73. Raj Kumar S/o Het Ram Silla, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 3-A-12 Sector 3 Mster Colony, Lunkaransar, Bikaner At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Shekhsar Block Lunoaransar, District Bikaner. 74. Rajshekhar S/o Dana Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Nehru Colony Sanchore, Dist. Jalore. At Present Working At Cbeo Office Jalore. 75. Rajveer Singh S/o Sumer Singh Rajpoot, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Kailash, Post Nethawa, Taranagar, District Churu At Present Working At Gsss Jhothara, Churu. 76. Ram Niwas Bagria S/o Om Prakash Bagria, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ward No. 22 Khajuwala, District Bikaner At Present Working At Gsss Khajuwala, District Bikaner. 77. Ranjeet Kumar S/o Pyarelalmeena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Bhojasar, Tehsil Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Gsss Redibhurawas, Block Taranagar District Churu. 78. Rati Ram S/o Haridassadh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Behind Sarasdharmkanta, Kaloo Road Ward No. 06 Kunkaransar, Bikaner At Present Working At Smp Govt. Gort Sr. Sec. Secool Bikaner. 79. Ravinder Singh Shekhawat S/o Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Street No. 10 Ambedkar Colony, Bikaner At Present Working At Directorate Secondary Education Bikaner. 80. Renu Choudhary D/o Rajkaranchoudhary, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward No. 7, At Present Working At Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School Sardarshahar. 81. Rohit Kumar Swami S/o Madanlal Swami, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Near Ramdev Temple Vpo Taranagarchuru At Present Working At Gsss Nuhandrajgarh, Churu. 82. Sandeep Kumar S/o Bahadur Singh Poonia, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Noohand Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu At Present Working At Gsss Chandgothichuru. 83. Sanjay Garg S/o Hanuman Prasad, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Chak 4 Arm, Kharwali, Chhattargarh, District Bikaner At Present Working At Gsss Chhattargarh. 84. Sandeep Kumar S/o Bhadar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vpo Nawan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu At Present Working At Gsss Nawan, Churu. 85. Sandeep Kumar S/o Om Prakash Shastri, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Behind Woolen Mill, Ward No. 24, Gandhinagar, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (12 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Churu At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Mehari. 86. Sanwar Mal Sharma S/o Suraj Mal Sharma, Aged About 43 Years, R/o 22, Brahman (Boharamohalla) Ramjipurakhurd, Tehsil Kishangarh, Renwal, District Jaipur At Present Gsss Ramjipurakalan. 87. Sharwan Singh S/o Gham Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Bikaner At Present Working At Gsss Pugal, 88. Shrawan Kumar Sahu S/o Manfoolsahu, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Raipura, Po Ratusar, Tehsil Sardarshahar, District Churu, At Present Working At Gsss Khejradikhnada, Churu. 89. Sikandar Khan S/o Sardar Khan, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpocholookhan District Nagaur At Present Working At Gsss Daulatpura A Block Didwana. 90. Suman D/o Ranver Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Behind Maajaallppa Devi College, Ward No. 16 Satyun Road, Taranagar, Churu At Present Working At Govt. Sr. Sec. School Changoi, Taranagar, District Churu. 91. Sumitra Railya S/o Dula Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vpo Jhareli, Village Rampur, A-B Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur At Present Working At Bls Govt. Sr. Sec. School Nimbijodha Block Ladnu, District Nagaur. 92. Surendra Khatri S/o Radheyshyam Sharma, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village And Post Doomroli, Tehsil Neemrana At Present Working At Gsss Kanhawas, Block Neemrana, Alwar. 93. Surendra Kumar Kadhayala S/o Jugalkishorkadhayala, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Churichatarpura, Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Gsss Churi, Ajitgarh, Jhunjhunu. 94. Suresh Kumar S/o Ghewar Ram Choudhary, Aged About 44 Years, R/o B-25, Abhaygarh Scheme Near K.v No. 1 (Af) Jodhpur At Present Working At Gsss Bhatinda, Jodhpur. 95. Sushila S/o Subhash Chandra, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Hansas, Post Jhanjha, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu At Present Working At Shaheedamarsingh Ggsss Sanwlod, Buhana, Jhunjhunu. 96. Subhash Chand S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No. 20 Near, Morning Bells, Public School Ambedkar Park Srivijaynagar, District Sriganganagar At Present Working At Gsss 10 Ksd Mokhamwal A Block Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar. 97. Vijay Karan S/o Bheru Dan Dharan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Aguna Bass, Mathaniya, Jodhpur At Present Working At Gsss, Newara Road, Osian Jodhpur. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (13 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 98. Vijay Kumar Swarnkar S/o Rajendra Prasad Swarnkar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Behind Agrasen Girls College Agrasenvihar, Hindaun City Karauli At Present Working At Gsss Fazilabadkarauli. 99. Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Mahaveer Prasad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Ghumanda Tehsil Ratangarh, Churu At Present Working At Govt. Senior Secondary School Menasar, Ratangarh, Churu. 100. Madan Lal S/o Prabhu Lal, Resident Of Village And Post Hadveda, Tehsil Shiv, District Barmer 101. Vishnu Singh S/o Shri Kailash Dan Charan, Resident Of Village And Post Tehla Via Paukalla, Tehsil Ria Badi District Nagaur. 102. Surendra Sharma S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, Resident Of H. No. 124, Ward No. 4, Behind Dr. Giri, Band Gali, Purani Abadi, Sriganganagar. 103. Mukesh Kumar Choudhary, Resident Of Village And Post Bibolao Ganeti, Todaraisingh, District Tonk. 104. Sanju Choudhary, Resident Of Village Firans Ka Bans, Post Chuneri, District Jhunjhunu. 105. Priyanka Solanki, Resident Of A-110, Anykampa Residency, Shastri Nagar, Durgapura, Jaipur. 106. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Amara Ram, Resident Of Village Jodi Ka Bas, Post Nawa Via Beri Choti, Tehsil Deedwana District Nagaur. 107. Sarita D/o Shri Gugan Ram, Resident Of Village And Post Office Sardarpura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu. 108. Manoj Kumar Singhal S/o Shri Om Prakash Singhal, Resident Of H. No. 3-A-27, Mahaveer Nagar Iii, Kota. 109. Sunaina Sharma D/o Shri Sagarmal Sharma, Resident Of Infront Of Poddar College, Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu. 110. Jagdish Sharma S/o Shri Kashi Ram, Resident Of Village And Post Kupali, Tehsil Srivijaynagar, District Sriganganagar. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 907/2023 1. Surendra S/o Shri Pokar Ram, Aged About 36 Years, Vilalge Naharo Ki Dhani, Post Jhanwar, District Jodhpur (Rajasthan). 2. Mahipal Vaishnawa S/o Shri Mani Ram, Aged About 42 Years, 44, Vaishnav Sadan, Maderna Colony, Jodhpur. ----Petitioners Versus [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (14 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. 3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer Through Its Chairman. 4. Shri Bhajan Lal Vishnoi, Government Senior Secondary School, Manaklao, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, (School Lecturer In Political Science). 5. Shri Pukh Raj, Government Senior Secondary School, Buchkala, Pipad, Jodhpur (School Lecturer In Hindi). 6. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1332/2023 1. Surendra Kumar S/o Sh. Amar Singh, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of 721/43, R.k. Puram, Bhajanganj, Dist. Ajmer. 2. Aadu Ram Choudhary S/o Sh. Bhera Ram Choudhary, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Jatipura, Osian District Jodhpur. 3. Pyare Lal S/o Sh. Ram Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Salwa Khurd, Post Pipad Road, Tehsil Pipad City, District Jodhpur. 4. Yogesh Kumar Joshi S/o Sh. Bhawani Shankar, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Joona Bazar, Village And Post Tinwari, District Jodhpur. 5. Suresh Prajapat S/o Sh. Kishna Ram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 116, Shikshak Nagar, Mata Ka Than, Punjla, District Jodhpur. 6. Ved Prakash Meena S/o Sh. Ram Charan Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Lalpur, Post Hadiya, Tehsil Mahwa, District Dausa. 7. Arvind Kumar Samariya S/o Sh. Kailash Chand Samariya, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Shakuntlam, Ward No. 40 Nearby Falsa Wala Balaji Hanuman Nagar, District Dausa. 8. Namonarayan Meena S/o Sh. Phaili Ram Meena, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Paparda, Tehsil Nangal Rajawthan, District Dausa. 9. Ajay Pal S/o Sh. Ratan Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Vpo Budibawal, Tehsil Kot Kasim, District Alwar. 10. Lokesh Mudgal S/o Sh. Banwari Lal Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Near Aradhana School Sanjay Nagar, District Bharatpur. 11. Sharwan Kumar Pareek S/o Sh. Laxmi Narayan Pareek, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gali No. 02 Gandhi Nagar, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (15 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] District Barmer. 12. Poonama Ram S/o Sh. Naga Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Sajan Ki Dhani, Post Sanpa Manji, Tehsil Sindhary, District Barmer. 13. Meka Ram S/o Sh. Dheema Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 01, Babalon Ki Dhaniyon, Village Kanawas Ka Pana, Post Jaleli Fozdara, District Jodhpur. 14. Sushil Kumar S/o Suraj Bhan, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Moi Sadda, Post Moi Purani, Via Singhana, District Jhunjhunu. 15. Sher Singh S/o Sh. Bhagwana Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village - Post Moi Purani, Via Singhana, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu. 16. Sohan Ram Jawliya S/o Sh. Jodha Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o V And P Karani/jhanwar, Jodhpur. 17. Mahesh Kumar S/o Sh. Puran Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Vpo Dharsoni, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur. 18. Subhash Chandra S/o Sh. Baldev Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Dadiya, Via Katarathal, District Sikar. 19. Moola Ram S/o Sh. Ramu Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Santoda Khurd, Post Malunga, Tehsil Tinwari, District Jodhpur. 20. Arif Mohammed Mansoori S/o Sh. Ismail Mohammed, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 411 Bsnl Office Ke Pass, Sector 4, Keshavpura, Dadabari, District Kota. 21. Vikas Arya S/o Sh. Subhash Chandra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Daulatpura, Post Chudela, District Jhunjhunu. 22. Kumbharam Samota S/o Sh. Baldev Singh Samta, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Trilokpura, Post Sihodi, Tehsil Shreemadhopur, District Sikar. 23. Mishra Ram Suthar S/o Sh. Maga Ram Suthar, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Post Sarno Ka Tala, Tehsil Sindhari, District Barmer. 24. Sawai Singh S/o Sh. Rawat Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Vandp Bilasar, Tehsil Sindhari, District Barmer. 25. Saket Kumar S/o Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 65 Teeku Ram Ka Bass, Village Jaisinghpura, Post Hetamsar, District Jhunjhunu. 26. Narendra Bishnoi S/o Sh. Shivnarayan Bishnoi, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Plot No. 102, Sanjay Colony, District Nagaur. 27. Bharat Lal Yadav S/o Sh. Hanuman Yadav, Aged About 38 Years, R/o P.no. B-4 Keshav Nagar, Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (16 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 28. Ram Niwas S/o Sh. Ram Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Vpo Sidhmukh, Tehsil Sidmukh, District Churu. 29. Lokesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Babu Lal Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vill. Antarheda, Post Patoli, Tehsil Mahwa, District Dausa. 30. Nitin Patnakar S/o Sh. Manik Rao Patankar, Aged About 46 Years, R/o H.no. 24, Gali No. 10 Saraswati Colony, Baran Road, District Kota. 31. Kumari Chanda D/o Sh. Khema Ram Jat, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Rajendra Singh Bijrania Ward No. 16 Govt. Hospital Ke Samne Palsana, District Sikar. 32. Kuldeep Kumar S/o Sh. Bhoop Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Hansiyawas, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu. 33. Praveen Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Mange Ram Yadav, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Vpo Katopur, Tehsil Kotkasim, District Alwar. 34. Dharmendra Singh S/o Sh. Rajendra Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Post Ghatri, Tehsil Bhusawar, District Bharatpur. 35. Mohan Lal Godara S/o Sh. Toga Ram Godara, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Govt. Sr. Sec. School Bhimda, District Barmer. 36. Lokesh Kumar S/o Sh. Dayanand, Aged About 40 Years, R/o V.p. Tain, Via Bissau, District Jhunjhunu. 37. Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 42 Years, R/o V.p. Tain, Via Bissau, District Jhunjhunu. 38. Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Sishu Pal Singh, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Bala Ka Bas, Post Birmi, District Jhunjhunu. 39. Sandeep Kumar Choudhary S/o Sh. Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Tigiyas, Post, Mandrella, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary To The Government, Department Of School Education, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer, Through Its Secretary. 4. Akin Middha S/o Sh. Krishan Lal Middha, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School (B) Suratgarh, District Sri-Ganganagar (Raj.). 5. Gayatri D/o Sh. Krishan Lal Sharma, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Prin. Karni Senior Secondary School, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (17 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Deshnok, District Bikaner (Raj.) 6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Sh. Chiranji Lal Sharma, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Dungargarh, District Bikaner (Raj.) 7. Isha Gupta D/o Sh. Tarsem Lal, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School (G), Suratgarh, District Sri-Ganganagar (Raj.). 8. Sunita Suthar D/o Sh. Jagdish Prasad, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Higher Secondary School Dabdi, District Hanumangarh (Raj.). 9. Pukhraj S/o Sh. Munna Ram, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School Buchkalan, Pipar City, District Jodhpur (Raj.) 10. Nirmala Adha D/o Sh. Hadmandan, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School, Rampura Bhatia, Tinwari, District Jodhpur (Raj.). ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2012/2023 1. Kuldeep Choudhary S/o Shri Bane Singh Choudhary, Aged About 34 Years, Village Dungarsingh Pura, Post Mundria Bara, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 2. Shiv Kumar S/o Shri Dalle Singh Kaswan, Aged About 35 Years, Village Jigasari Bari, Post Mundria Bara, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. 3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner (Rpsc), Ajmer Through Its Chairman. 4. Shri Sahab Ram S/o Shri Om Prakash, School Lecturer In Political Science, Government Senior Secondary School Sheoratada, Bhadra, R/o Dungarsinghpura, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh 335502 5. Shri Surendra Singh S/o Shri Atma Ram, School Lecturer In Hindi, Government Senior Secondary School Sheoratada, Bhadra, R/o Village Nethrana, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh (Raj.). ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7146/2023 1. Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Sardara Ram, Aged About 46 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (18 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Years, Resident Of Kalori, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu. 2. Gudiya Choudhary D/o Shri Godha Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Near Railway Station, Khadibagh, Garedo Ki Dhani, Ward No. 7, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur 3. Arvind Galav S/o Shri Omprakash Galav, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Rinjha, Post Salpura, Tehsil Chhabra, District Baran 4. Sanjay Kumar S/o Shri Ramniwas, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Tehadki (Blaki Dhani), Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar 5. Hitesh Kumar Suthar S/o Shri Dhulji Suthar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Post Jogiwara, Tehsil Sabla, District Dungarpur 6. Kapil Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Omprakash Gupta, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Plot No. 235, Shanti Kunj, District Alwar 7. Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Jaynarayan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Bhuda Ka Bas (Sheetal), Post Butiyana, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar 8. Jagtar Singh S/o Shri Kirpal Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o House No. 6, Street No. 1, Braham Colony, Naer Basanti Check, District Sri Ganganagar 9. Dheera Ram S/o Shri Parkha Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Jalampura, Post Jeevana, Tehsil Sayala, District Jalore 10. Chandra Shekhar Jain S/o Shri Roopchand Jain, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Prakarsh Medical Sotre, Near P.n.b., Baroda Mev, District Alwar 11. Inder Singh S/o Shri Pratap Singh Kalja, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Chelanabas, Post Lakhlan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu 12. Hukam Chand Saini S/o Shri Dalchand Saini, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Sedh Mohalla, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar 13. Ramesh Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Jhuntha Ram Gora, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Behind A.n. Public School, Kacholiya Road, Radhaswami Bagh, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur 14. Hariom S/o Shri Ramji Dass, Aged About 34 Years, R/o House No. 3/234, Ward No. 5, Housing Board Colony, District Hanumangarh 15. Ramawatar Kumawat S/o Shri Babulal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Near Bus Stand, Ward No. 5, Chokadi Vias Guhala, District Sikar 16. Indraj Godara S/o Shri Omprakash, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Village - 4 S.k.m., Post - 1 S.k.m., Tehsil Gharsana, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (19 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] District Sri Ganganagar 17. Ramswarup Saini S/o Shri Chauthu Ram Saini, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Deeppura, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu 18. Kishan Sompura S/o Shri Bharat Kumar Sompura, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Salathwara, Tehsil Sagwara, District Dungarpur 19. Rakesh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Arjun Lal Yadav, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Bhagtawari Ki Dhani, Nolakha Kothi, Village And Post Hadota, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur 20. Monika D/o Shri Bajrang Lal, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Shyopura, Post Ojtou, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu 21. Harish Chandra S/o Shri Maniram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Chunawad, District Sri Ganganagar 22. Uttam Singh S/o Shri Chatra Pal Singh, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Panlava Via Beedasar, District Sikar 23. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Vidhyadhar Saini, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Sotwara, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu 24. Shalini Marwaha D/o Shri Khanchand Arora, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 53/120, Veer Tejaji Road, Mansarovar, District Jaipur 25. Bala Ram S/o Shri Sada Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Jeganiya Bidawatan Via Rajaldesar, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu 26. Rizvana Bagum D/o Mohammad Husain, Aged About 34 Years, R/o House No. 7-C-21, Vigyan Nagar Extension, District Kota 27. Hemant Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Sohan Lal Kumawat, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 11, Village Nangal, Post Bay, Tehsil Dataramgarh, District Sikar 28. Suresh Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Ram Narayan Kumawat, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Arlai, Post Kheraruddha, Tehsil Ramganjmandi, District Kota 29. Rajeev Meena S/o Shri Ramsahay Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Manch, Post Ata, District Karauli 30. Narayan Ram S/o Shri Mohan Lal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ward No. 9, Nahrawali, Tehsil Anoopgarh, District Sri Ganganagar 31. Rajveer Singh Jat S/o Shri Rameshwar Jat, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Vajirpur, Tehsil Vajirpur, District Sawai Madhopur 32. Sarvesh S/o Shri Lakhmi Chand, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Chiruni, Post Pipali, Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar 33. Yunis Ali S/o Shri Rustam Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Bilaspur, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (20 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 34. Mohammed Iqbal S/o Shri Mohammed Usman, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Near Haidari Masjid, Gopeshwar Basti, Gangashahar, District Bikaner 35. Lalit Patidar S/o Shri Mahesh Patidar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Gamadi, Post Aamja, Tehsil Gadhi, District Banswara 36. Nirmala Saini D/o Shri Girdhari Lal Saini, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Anjani Hanuman Mandir, Ringas Road, Hadota, Chomu, District Jaipur 37. Ramesh Serawat S/o Shri Mangi Lal Serawat, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Veer Sagar Ki Dhani, Village Post Itawa, Bhopaji, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur 38. Preeti Yadav D/o Shri Rohitashwa Singh Yadav, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Jakhrana, Tehsil Behrod, District Alwar 39. Savitri Sharma D/o Shri Sukh Lal Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o C/o Geeta Sharma 27 Ramavihar 100 Feet Road Meeranagar, Sobhagpura Udaipur 40. Omprakash S/o Shri Radha Krishan, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Near P.h.e.d., Ward No. 20, Sadulshahar, District Sri Ganganagar 41. Mohan Ram S/o Shri Jawara Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Khardapura, Post Rajliya, Tehsil Nava, District Nagaur 42. Rakesh Kumawat S/o Shri Radheyshyam Kumawat, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Near Panchwati, Govindgarh, District Jaipur 43. Pooja Poonia D/o Shri Abhish Poonia, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Phooleji, Tehsil Loonkaransar, District Bikaner 44. Geeta Meena D/o Shri Ramswaroop, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Kachawa, Post Todanagar, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar 45. Vinod Garu S/o Shri Roshan Lal Garu, Aged About 43 Years, R/o P.w.d. Road, Mukherjee Chowk, Kankroli, District Rajsamand 46. Arun Kumar S/o Shri Chhotu Ram Meena, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village- Narhait, Post- Pratapgarh,tehsil- Thanagazi, District Alwar 47. Kuldeep Meena S/o Shri Sitaram Meena, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ranodiya, Tehsil Pipalda, District Kota 48. Dolat Singh S/o Shri Mohan Singh, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Post Peshua, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi 49. Deepakshi Saxena D/o Shri Anil Saxena, Aged About 34 Years, R/o B-357, Janta Colony, District Jaipur 50. Rakesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Birbal Ram Meena, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Dholasari, Tehsil Dataramgarh, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (21 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] District Sikar 51. Gargi Sharma D/o Shri Dilip Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ward No. 40, Veer Hanuman Mandir, Near Mahesh Cinema, Khemi Sati Road, District Jhunjhunu 52. Pravesh Jain S/o Shri Lokendra Jain, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 66/28, Heerapath, Mansarovar, District Jaipur 53. Ramniwas Yadav S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Kuned, Tehsil Kotputali, District Jaipur 54. Shyama Khandelwal D/o Shri Satya Narayan Gupta, Aged About 43 Years, R/o 122/211, Vijaypath, Agrawal Farm, Mansarovar, District Jaipur 55. Babeeta Kumari D/o Shri Babu Ram Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vp Mohanpura Bhamarwasi, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu 56. Sunil Kumar Parihar S/o Shri Man Singh Parihar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 689, Hanuman Nagar, Kota Road, Deoli, Tehsil- Jahazpur, District- Bhilwara 57. Kavita D/o Shri Gyan Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Bijali Colony, Ward No. 41, District Hanumangarh. 58. Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Paltu Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Scheme No.2, Lajpat Nagar Near Easy Day Alwar. 59. Omprakash Morya S/o Shri Prabhu Ram Morya, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Regaron Ka Mohalla, Bidiyad, Tehsil Parbatsar, District Nagaur. 60. Chetna Choudhary D/o Shri Narendra Singh Choudhary, Aged About 37 Years, R/o House Number 75/80, Veer Tajaji Nagar, Daurai, Beawar Road, District Ajmer. 61. Dinesh Kumar S/o Shri Babu Lal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Indira Colony Vistar, Tehsil And District Pali. 62. Sunita Kumari D/o Shri Harphool Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o V.p.o.- Beri, Tehsil And District Sikar. 63. Usha Saugat D/o Shri Shriram Saugat, Aged About 43 Years, R/o V.p.o. Bhandodi, Tehsil And District Alwar. 64. Suresh Kumar Soni S/o Shri Lallu Ram Soni, Aged About 35 Years, R/o V.p.o. Buteri, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar. 65. Neelu Agarwal D/o Shri Bhagwati Lal Agarwal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 2, New Trimurti Complex, Hiran Magri, Sector-4 , District Udaipur. 66. Samina Bano D/o Shri Shahid Hussain., Aged About 35 Years, R/o House Number 1B, Gali Number 9, Saraswati Colony Police Line Road , District Kota. 67. Sanjay Kumar Muniya S/o Shri Mansingh Muniya, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Kakanwani, Post Ramgarh, Tehsil Kushalgarh, District Banswara. 68. Rajendra Kumar Meena S/o Shri Banwari Lal Meena, Aged [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (22 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] About 36 Years, R/o V.p.o. Kant, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur. 69. Gyarsi Lal Saini S/o Shri Birdu Ram Saini, Aged About 45 Years, R/o R/o 43, Modi Bag Ward No. 31 Chhawani, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar . 70. Sanjay Rawat S/o Shri Rajendra Rawat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o V.p.o. Chhoti Badrel, District Banswara. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner 3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Rajasthan, Ajmer Through Its Secretary 4. Akin Middha S/o Shri Krishan Lal Middha, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar. 5. Gayatri D/o Shri Krishan Lal Sharma, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Prin. Karni Senior Secondary School, Deshnok, District Bikaner. 6. Mahendra Kumar Dadhich S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Sharma, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Girls Senior Secondary School, Dungargarh, District Bikaner. 7. Isha Gupta D/o Shri Tarsem Lal, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar. 8. Sunita Suthar D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Higher Secondary School Dabdi, District 9. Pukhraj S/o Shri Munna Ram, At Present Posted As Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School Buchkalan, Pipar City, District Jodhpur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11975/2024 1. Sunil Choudhary S/o Kishna Ram Choudhary, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of 41, Veer Teja Colony, Outside Mahamandir 3Rd Pole, Jodhpur. 2. Vikas Tiwari S/o Sriniwas Tiwari, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Near Vishnoi Dharamshala, Sanjay Colony, Nagaur. ----Petitioners [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (23 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. ----Respondents D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 119/2025 1. Madan Mohan Sharma S/o Badri Lal Sharma, Aged About 53 Years, R/o 217-A, Amrit Nagar, Iskon Road, Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Manchanda Soni S/o Naresh Kumar Soni, Aged About 50 Years, 33, New Colony, Under Khatipura Overbridge, Khatipura Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Mukh Ram Yadav S/o Nigal Singh Yadav, Aged About 58 Years, Vpo Kanwarpura, Tehsil Kotputli, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 4. Kamal Kishor Sharma S/o Laxmi Narayan Sharma, Aged About 46 Years, Ward No. 01, Bus Stand Nathawala, Tehsil Shahpura, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 5. Meghraj Sharma S/o Ramkumar Sharma, Aged About 36 Years, Village Raheda Post Kalyanpura Khurd, Tehsil Kotputli, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 6. Sunil Kumar Jangir S/o Shri Nand Kishor Jangir, Aged About 32 Years, 57, Abhinandan Vihar, Bajri Mandi Road, Panchyawala Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 7. Amba Lal Gurjar S/o Gopee Lal Gurjar, Aged About 55 Years, 767-D, Krish Nagar, Tol-Tax, Tonk Road, Sanganer, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 8. Prerna Bhardwaj W/o Shailendra Bhatt, Aged About 51 Years, S-57, Mahaveer Nagar, Durgapura, Tonk Road, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 9. Akhter Bano W/o Abdul Haque, Aged About 50 Years, Home No. 4354, Topkahne Ka Rasta, Chandpol Bazar, Near Ek Meenar Masjid, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. 10. Surendar Singh Rathor S/o Tej Singh Rathor, Aged About 38 Years, Village Mothuka, Post Dalpatpura, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, Dist. Sikar, Rajasthan. 11. Amrit Lal S/o Gordhan Prasad Joshi, Aged About 44 Years, Near Rayat, Building Bagar Chowk, Nagori Get Ke Andar, Dist. Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 12. Rameshwar S/o Om Prakash Suthar, Aged About 46 Years, Behind Govt, Hospital Near Vishnoi Bagechi, Pipar [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (24 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] City, Dist. Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 13. Deepti Chatur Jain D/o Shri Suman Chatur, Aged About 47 Years, 11/12, Eklingnath Colony, Sector-4, Hiran Magri, Near Bsnl, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 14. Anand Kumar Jain S/o Sohan Lal Jain, Aged About 50 Years, 6 A, Gayatri Nagar, Behind Sofiya School, South Sunderwas, Block Girwa, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 15. Devendra Gameti S/o Kuku Ram Gameti, Aged About 37 Years, H. No. 532/6, Ward No. 26, Awari Mata Colony, Gayariawas Road, Tehsil Girva, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 16. Bhupendra Purbia S/o Premchand Ji Purbia, Aged About 56 Years, C-224, Ambamata Scheme, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 17. Keerti Kumar Gandhi S/o Gebi Lal Gandhi, Aged About 50 Years, Bapu Bazar, Near Police Thana, Po Rishabhdeo Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 18. Umesh Salwi S/o Babu Lal Salwi, Aged About 43 Years, 153 Loveli State, Roopsagar Road, Behind Of Shubh-Labh Apartment, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 19. Jagdish Chandra Jat S/o Gulab Chand Jat, Aged About 48 Years, Vpo Rundera, Tehsil Vallabhnagar, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 20. Jagdish Chandra Choubisa S/o Ghanshyam Lal Choubisa, Aged About 55 Years, Ragunath Temple Inside Surajpole Bhinder, Tehsil Bhinder, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. 21. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Ramji Lal Meena, Aged About 37 Years, Village Nayawas Post Nangal Rajawthan, Tehsil Raruwas, Dausa, Rajasthan. 22. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Devchand Meena, Aged About 38 Years, Vpo Aund Meena, Tehsil Mahwa, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 23. Sushil Kumar Sharma S/o Rameshwar Prasad Sharma, Aged About 46 Years, Karni Nagar, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 24. Man Mohan Sharma S/o Kailash Chandra Sharma, Aged About 44 Years, Vpo Kalwan, Tehsil Sikrai Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 25. Rajbai Gupta D/o Purushottam Gupta, Aged About 43 Years, Ashok Nagar,-I,dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 26. Mithalal Gurja S/o Girraj Prasad Gurjar, Aged About 47 Years, Village Dhigariya Tappa Koleswer, Tehsil Bandikui, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 27. Shivam Gurjar S/o Sahab Singh Gurjar, Aged About 42 Years, Vpo Paota, Tehsil Mahwa, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 28. Ramawatar Bairwa S/o Shravan Kumar Bairwa, Aged [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (25 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] About 43 Years, Village-Nangal Jhamar Wara, Post, Biwai, Tehsil Baijupaoa, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 29. Mohan Upadhyay S/o Prahlad Sharma, Aged About 51 Years, D-9, Upadhyay Sadan, Panchayat Samiti Ke Piche, New Colony, Lalsot, Dist. Dausa, Rajasthan. 30. Maya Meena D/o Kishan Lal Meena, Aged About 41 Years, Teeba Wali Dhani, Khori, Dist. Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of School Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 3. Joint Secretary, Education Department (Group-2), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 4. Ashutosh Das Agarwal (Employer Id Rjjp198918016316), Through The Office Of Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 5. Vinod Kumar (Employer Id Rjpo198736011787), Through The Office Of Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 6. Narendra Kumar Sharma (Employer Id Rjsm199732003104), Through The Office Of Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 7. Pradeep Singh Meena (Employer Id Rjbw199708009058), Through The Office Of Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Respondents connected with D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6281/2022 URN: CW / 12270U / 2022 1. Sunil Mishra S/o Kunj Bihari Mishra, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 42, Malviya Nagar, Near Gaurav Tower, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Mohit Sankrit S/o Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Bhojawas, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, (Raj.). 3. Dara Singh S/o Ramesh Chand, Aged About 37 Years, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (26 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] R/o Village Sihali Khurel, Post Sihali Kalan, Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar - 301401. 4. Ravi Prakash Kathotia S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 29, Post Sardarpura Bass, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh. 5. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Shivram Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o GSSS, raisar, Jamwa Ramgarh, District Jaipur. 6. Shivani Pareek S/o Dinesh Pareek, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Anand Chowk, Mamta Circle, Devli, District Tonk (Raj.) 7. Ambuj Kumar S/o Nathulal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o 32 B Block, Near Central School No.1, Pratap Nagar, Udaipur (Raj.) 8. Girraj Prasad Meena S/o Pyare Lal Meena, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Manema, Post Katkar, Tehsil Hindaun City, District Karauli, Rajasthan. 9. Bhawani Singh S/o Shambhu Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 182, Shastri Nagar, Tehsil Hudda, District Bhilwara - 311021. 10. Ameen Khan S/o Kallu Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o 1242/51, Jailar Wali Gali, Near Kabristan, Ajmer (Raj.) 11. Vinit Kumar S/o Gangaram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Sherpur, Post Katopur, Tehsil Kotkasim, District Alwar - 301702. 12. Prem Shankar Meena S/o Jeevan Lal Meena, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Surarikala, Post Barauli, Tehsil Sarmthura, District Dholpur - 3280311. 13. Manoj Meena S/o Brij Mohan Meena, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Khilahipur Meena, Post Nagal Pahari, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli - 322238. 14. Prithvi Raj S/o Lal Chand, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Near Ramdev Temple, Post Gajsinghpur, District Srigananagar - 335024. 15. Kuldeep Singh S/o Narayan Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No. 29, Kalyanpura, Marg No. 4, Khatriyo Ka Bass, District Barmer - 344001. 16. Dr. Bhoor Singh Meena S/o Lohadchya Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Milaksray, Post Sop, Tehsil Nadouti, District Karauli - 322204. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (27 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 17. Shilpa W/o Paras Kumar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Jat Basti, Islampur, Jhunjhunu (Raj.). 18. Hemant Kumar Arvind S/o Jagdish Prasad Arvind, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Kota Road, Retipara, Sangod, District Kota, Rajasthan. 19. Nandan Kamal Prakash Saini S/o Om Prakash Saini, Aged About 39 Years, R/o E-399, Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur - 302039. 20. Amarjeet Singh S/o Garjant Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Anupgarh, Preeti Palace, Ward No.22, Ganganagar (Raj.). 21. Moh. Rashid S/o Moh Salim, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Shekhsar Ward No. 10, Tehsil Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan - 333001. 22. Virendara Sahewal S/o Gyanchand Sahewal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No.11, Nohar, Hanumangarh (Raj.) 23. Chandan Chawla S/o Naresh Chander Chawla, Aged About 36 Years, R/o F-16, Satyam Nagar, Gangangar (Raj.) 24. Kuldeepak Mewara S/o Balram Mewara, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mali Mohalla, Dug, Jhalawar (Raj.) 25. Narendra Singh S/o Deep Chand Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Kachwana, District Bhadra, District Hanumangarh - 335504. 26. Sandeep Mittal S/o Nand Lal Mittal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 70-N Block, Ward No. 61, Shriganganagar (Raj.) - 335001. 27. Manish Kumar S/o Yadram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 391, Mahaveer Colony, Bhadana, Kota (Raj.). 28. Sanjana Khetawat D/o Jitendra Khetawat, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Diggi Bajar, Ajmer (Raj.). 29. Ravinder Kumar S/o Surender Kumar Modi, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 7/251 Rhb Colony, Hanumangarh (Raj.). 30. Balram Meena S/o Jaipal Meena, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Balaji Ke Niche, Baso Kala, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.). 31. Brijesh Malakar S/o Om Prakash Malakar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Near City Post Office, Kishangarh, Ajmer (Raj.). [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (28 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 32. Vipin Kumar Sharma S/o Manoj Kumar Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No.20, Shyam Mandir, Nohar, Hanumangarh (Raj.). 33. Vimal Kumar Badiwal S/o Sitaram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Vimalpura, Post Kanarpura, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur (Raj.) - 303801. 34. Abhishek Chaudhary S/o Jai Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Raboori, Post Rawatsar Kunjla, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu (Raj.) - 331303. 35. Surender Singh S/o Harbans Singh, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Ward No.11, Old Abadi, Sriganganagar (Raj.). 36. Priyanka Rana D/o Ramesh Kumar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Samula, Kangara, Himachal Pradesh Presently Posted At Gsss 3Nd, Anupgarh, Ganganagar (Raj.). 37. Pawan Kumar S/o Govind Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Bassai, Mahendergarh, Haryana 38. Mishri Lal Sharma S/o Babu Lal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Nagla Ahiwasi, Aligarh (Up). 39. Samsher Ali S/o Liyakat Ali, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Tal, Post Rasoolpur, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu - 333020. 40. Rohitash Kumar S/o Jagdish Prasad Meena, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Kanch Ki Bass, Post Jaluki, Tehsil Nagaur, District Bharatpur(Raj.). 41. Mukesh S/o Malaram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Mundital, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu - 331023. 42. Sagar Singh Meena S/o Daya Ram Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Surajpura Mal, Post Jhanjhani, Tehsil Chhipabarod, District Baran, Rajasthan. 43. Prasanna Paul S/o Anil Prakash Paul, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Aadarsh Colony, 45, Post Bansur, District Alwar - 301402. 44. Sandeep Kumar S/o Krishan Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Gsss, Bhirani, Bhadra, Hanumangarh (Raj.). 45. Durgesh Dauneria S/o Pramod Kumar Dauneria, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Teachers Colony, 78, Ward No. 31, Tehsil Agra, District Agra, Uttar Pradesh. 46. Ankita Chauhan W/o Lovenish Saini, Aged About 39 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (29 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Years, R/o 47- C Block, Vishnu Vihar, Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.). 47. Hariram Meena S/o Mangtu Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Babaji Ka Neigla, Ward No. 10, Post Bhandaur, District Bharatpur (Raj.) - 321026. 48. Tek Chand S/o Mahender Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o New Mandi, Gharsana, Ganganagar (Raj.). 49. Lokendra Singh S/o Bhoop Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Gadalpur, Post Parmadra, Tehsil Deeg, District Bharatpur (Raj.) - 321203. 50. Manish Agarwal S/o Mohan Lal Agarwal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 105, Aadarsh Nagar-A, Sawaimadhopur (Raj.). 51. Ashvani Kumar Bhardwaj S/o Ramanand Sharma, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Bhandoli, Guthali, Bulandshahar (Up). 52. Arun Kumar S/o Yadram Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Samesura, Ibrahimpur, Bharatpur (Raj.). 53. Shyam Garg S/o Mahesh Chand, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Modi Padda, Old City, Dholpur (Raj.). 54. Giriraj Sharma S/o Ramavtar Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 42A, Arya Nagar, Murlipura, Jaipur (Raj.). 55. Dinesh Chhimpa S/o Vijay Ratan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No.14, Bikaner (Raj.). 56. Vikram Singh S/o Onkar Mal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Jejusar, Jhunjhunu (Raj.). 57. Deepak Gotherwal S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Sambhar Lake, New Bus Stand, Jaipur (Raj.). 58. Pooja Verma S/o Brahmram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gali No.3, Nathwali, Ganganagar (Raj.). 59. Chander Shekhar S/o Subhash Nanda, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No.43, Sureshla, Hanumangarh (Raj.). 60. Pooja D/o Dwarka Prasad Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No.24, Sangaria, Hanumangarh (Raj.). 61. Dinesh Kumar S/o Manak Chand, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Mahaveer Nagar, Extension, Kota (Raj.). 62. Manish Chawra S/o Prem Kumar Chawra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Plot No. 135, Roop Nagar, Pawta, Distt. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (30 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Jodhpur (Raj.). 63. Vijay Pal S/o Shri Balram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Ward No. 23, Behind The Bishnoi Temple, Rawatsar, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.). 64. Sudhir Kumar Garuwa S/o Shri Hanuman Garuwa, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ward No. 21, Sanjay Colony, Rawatsar, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.). 65. Vishnu Kumar Dhakad S/o Mangal Ram Dhakad, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Bamori, Bagaur, Distt. Karoli (Raj.). 66. Chet Ram Meena S/o Shri Shyoraj Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Khaspuriya, Post Khaspuriya, Tehsil Mangrol, Distt. Bundi (Raj.). 67. Mahendra Jajoria S/o Shri Dolat Ram Kumawat, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Gsss Lorda, Tehsil Gadhi, Distt. Banswara (Raj.). 68. Deepak Kumar Sharma S/o Rajkumar Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Sector-11A, 1 Arw, Hanumangarh Junction, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.). 69. Ranu Solanki S/o Khushi Ram Solanki, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Chhipo Ka Mohalla, Naya Shahar, Kishangarh, Distt. Ajmer (Raj.). 70. Amit Rohila S/o Devendra Rohila, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 24, Samaspura Road, Dhupia Colony, Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.). 71. Sapana Yadav D/o Satyapal Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Shimla, Tehsil Khetri, Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.). 72. Sushil Kumar Tandi S/o Shri Genaram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Tandiyo Ka Bas, Idwa, Distt. Nagaur (Raj.). 73. Averinder Pal Jeet Singh S/o Gurmel Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Chak 07, Mld, Tehsil Gharsana, Distt. Sriganganagar (Raj.). 74. Anita Khandelwal D/o Ram Babu Gupta, Aged About 38 Years, R/o B-45 A, Green Park Colony, Behind Rajesh Toyota Showroon, Agra Road, Jaipur. 75. Dharm Singh Meena S/o Shri Ramfool Meena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Kurigama, Post Leelothi, Tehsil Sarmthura, Distt. Dholpur (Raj.). 76. Deepak Narayan Vyas S/o Shri Yadunandan Narayan [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (31 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Vyas, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Near Pushkarna School, Distt. Bikaner (Raj.). 77. Surekha Yadav D/o Shri Sube Singh Yadav, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 240, Mehta Ko Mohalla, Silarpur, Distt. Alwar (Raj.). 78. Manohar Singh Suthar S/o Shri Hanuman Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Dablisara, Chawa, Distt. Barmer (Raj.). 79. Karuna Faujdar D/o Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 37, Chowk Nangla, Jeevna, Sogar, Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.). 80. Jagram Choudhary S/o Shri Bagta Ram Choudhary, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Sindhari Chootoo, Distt. Barmer (Raj.). 81. Amar Singh S/o Maniram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ward No. 1, Harijan Basti Deeplana, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.). 82. Vinay Kumar Soni S/o Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 16, Nai Sadak, Distt. Churu (Raj.). 83. Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Subhash Chandra, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Sulkhaniya Chhota, Distt. Churu (Raj.). 84. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Balkishan Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Koondla, Post Shahpura, Tehsil Mangrol, Distt. Baran (Raj.). 85. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Hanuman Parsad, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Ward No. 13, Goluwala Niwadan, Tehsil Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan - 335802. 86. Naval Kishor Meena S/o Shri Rameshwar Dayal Meena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 35, Ward No. 12, Hanuman Mandir Ke Pass, Keshopura, Distt. Kota (Raj.). 87. Pawan Kumar Meena S/o Shri Rameshwar Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 49, Thakur Ji Ka Mohalla, Shyopura, Pipalda, Distt. Kota (Raj.). 88. Sushant Sharma S/o Tilok Chand Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 20, Gaushala Road, Nohar, Hanumangarh (Raj.). 89. Praveen Kumar Ghintala S/o Lota Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Fefana, 1 Knn, Nohar Hanumangarh (Raj.). [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (32 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 90. Manu S/o Narendra Singh Malik, Aged About 36 Years, Ward No. 12, Gayatri Nagar, Nadbai, Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.). 91. Mukesh Kumar Kaushal S/o Shri Badri Lal Kaushal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 04, Laxmi Market, Chhan, Distt. Sawaimadhopur (Raj.). 92. Nand Kishor Bijaraniya S/o Shri Narayan Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 20, Laushal Chhoti, Distt. Sikar (Raj.). 93. Mahesh Suthar S/o Shri Likhmi Chand, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 48, Tayagiji Ki Bagichi, Rathori Kuwa, Distt. Nagaur (Raj.) - 341001. 94. Brajesh Kumar Bidasar S/o Ratna Ram Bidasar, Aged About 31 Years, Village And Post Siwa, Tehsil Nagaur, District Nagaur, Rajasthan. 95. Rajendra Kumar Aarya S/o Ramswaroop Aarya, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Near Ups School, Nawalpura, Distt. Bundi (Raj.). 96. Vikas Kumar Soni S/o Shanker Lal Soni, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Shiv Sagar Kunj, Ward No. 22, Distt. Sikar (Raj.). 97. Vinod Kumar Gupta S/o Ghanshyam Gupta, Aged About 38 Years, Lata Gali, Near Govt. School, Udai Mod, Gangapur City, Distt. Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. 98. Mukesh Kumar Verma S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Verma, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Mohalla Regron Ka, Village Nasirda, Distt. Tonk (Raj.). 99. Gurvinder Singh S/o Shri Balakaran Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 01, 30 Ppp, Distt. Ganganagar (Raj.). 100. Gurpreet Singh S/o Daleep Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Indira Colony, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.). 101. Sachin Kumar Bansal S/o Shri Ram Kumar Bansal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 165, On Nh-62, Thakur Virendra Nagar, Mandour, Ditt. Jodhpur (Raj.). 102. Naveen Kumar Sharma S/o Sitaram Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Plot No. 14, Ganesh Nagar-B, Distt. Sawaimadhopur (Raj.). [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (33 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 103. Uttam Prkash Verma S/o Shri Jugal Kishor, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No. 08, Near Shyam Park, Shrimadhopur, District Sikar, (Raj.). 104. Naveen Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Shimbhu Dayal Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Roop Pura, Post Thao, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar (Raj.). 105. Narendra Kumar Meena S/o Shri Ramkaran Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Gram Khandila, Post - Khuri, Distt. Baran (Raj.). 106. Pawan Kumar Saharan S/o Banvari Lal Saharan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Bhalau Tiba, Bhalau, Tal, Distt. Churu (Raj.). 107. Pushpa Soni D/o Rai Chand Soni, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward No. 18, Ladnu, Distt. Nagaur (Raj.). 108. Shiv Kumar Tak S/o Dulichand Tak, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Ward No. 70, Gali No. 6, Chokuti Mohalla, Distt. Bikaner (Raj.). 109. Mittho Lal S/o Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village And Post Usrami, Tehsil Kumher, Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.). 110. Amit Nama S/o Omprakash, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Mahaveer Nagar-Iii, Distt. Kota (Raj.). 111. Krishna Kumar Meena S/o Shri Bhuralal Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Goramgarh, Post Kuradiya, Tehsil Jahajpur, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 112. Niranjan Singh Shekhawat S/o Manohar Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village And Post Bagar, Shekhawat Colony District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 113. Pramod Saini S/o Ramswarup Saini, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Bagadiya School Ke Samne, Laxmangarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.). 114. Kamal Kishor S/o Tejpal Rathi, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Avadhpuri, Jonsganj, Distt. Ajmer (Raj.)- 305001. 115. Mukesh Kumar Roj S/o Mahadev Prasad Roj, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Govt. Senior Secondary School, Boghwas, Sambhar Lake, Jaipur. 116. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Rohitash Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Fatehpur, Bansur, District Alwar, Rajasthan. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (34 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Board Of Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 3. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, District Ajmer, Rajasthan. 4. Abhishek Pareek S/o Om Prakash Pareek, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 22, Behind Shanker Takies, Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Presently Posted As School Lecturer At Government Sr. Secondary School, Dindoli, Rashmi, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan. 5. Neeraj Sharma S/o Ramgopal Sharma, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Behind Parshuram Dharmshala Badi, District Dholpur, Presently Posted As School Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School Kanchanpur, Bari, District Dholpur, Rajasthan. 6. Jooth Singh S/o Mod Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Rajpura, Gudau, Sanchor, District Jalore, Rajasthan, Presently Posted As School Lecturer At Government Senior Secondary School, Dungri, Raniwara, District Jalore, Rajasthan. 7. Sugan Singh Shekhawat S/o Ummed Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Maksudpura, Sujawas, Ranoli, District Sikar, Presently Posted As School Lecturer At Bolo Ka Sanwata, Gangrar, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan. ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 895/2023 URN: CW / 1672U / 2023 1. Pradeep Kumar Khanagwal S/o Jugel Kishor Verma, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Vpo Jawanpura, Via Bhabru Tehsil Virat Nagar, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Rajesh Kumar Dhakar S/o Ram Kishan Dhakar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Balapura, Baori, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (35 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Todaraisingh, Tonk Rajasthan. 3. Alka Patidar D/o Bhawani Shankar Patidar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Dhakar Colony, Todaraisingh, Tehsil Todaraisingh, District Tonk. 4. Amilal Saini S/o Rohitashwa Saini, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Chipparai, Post Harsora, Tehsil Bansur District Alwar, Rajasthan. 5. Anand Baboo Baghel S/o Dharam Singh Baghel, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Plot No. 3 Behind Residency School, Sardar Patel Marg C Scheme Jaipur Rajasthan. 6. Anjali Gupta D/o Jugal Kishor Gupta, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 52 Narsingh Vihar Gokulpura, Rajasthan. 7. Archana Joshi D/o Surya Nandan Tiwari, Aged About 39 Years, R/o 20/21, Chitrakut Gokul Dham Society Bhilwara District Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 8. Ashish Kumar Bayle S/o Dinesh Kumar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o House No. 178, New Shakti Nagar, Aanm Ka Talab, Naka Madar Ajmer, Rajasthan. 9. Bharti Jangir S/o Subhash Chandra Jangir, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Chara Ka Bas, Parasrampura, Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 10. Bipin Sharma S/o Chhotey Lal Sharma, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 462, Ustan Bhawan, Sita Wadi Karauli, Karauli, Rajasthan. 11. Deepika Saini D/o Sugan Lal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Dev Bhawan, Behind Ice Factory, Ajmer Road, Kekri, Ajmer, Rajasthan. 12. Deevan Singh S/o Bharat Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Nagar Road, Near Hanuman Temple, Deeg, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 13. Deeya Ram S/o Vishna Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Reigaro Ka Bharala Bass Nanan Road Pipar City, Jodhpur Rajasthan. 14. Devendra Kumar Meghwanshi S/o Mor Pal Meghwanshi, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Banthanli, Dooni, Tonk, Rajasthan. 15. Devesh Kumar Sharma S/o Yogeshwar Kumar Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Near Co-Operative Bank Bissau Road, Ward No 34 Churu , Rajasthan. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (36 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 16. Dilip Kumar Garhwal S/o Suraj Mal Garhwal, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vpo Jajekalan, Shahpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 17. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Mohan Lal Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Dungari Wali Dhani, Nirjharna Lalsot Dausa, Rajasthan. 18. Gajraj S/o Hanuman Prasad, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Surya Nagar, Ward No. 27 Hanuman Garh Town, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 19. Ganpat Lal Pannu S/o Teeka Ram Pannu, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Lundawas, Po Rupawas, Tehsil Sojat City, District Pali Rajasthan. 20. Gunjan Bhambu D/o Kashmir Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 71, Sanjay Colony, Rpa Road, Near Panipech, Jaipur Rajasthan. 21. Hemraj Yadav S/o Mahadev Yadav, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Vpo Hanutia Via Amarsar, Shahpura, Jaipur Rajasthan. 22. Indu Chitosia D/o Santosh Kumar Chitosia, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 291, Chota Circle, 60 Feet Road, Jyanti Nagar, 52 Foot Hanuman Mandir, Agra Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 23. Jaikaran Singh Godara S/o Surender Singh Godara, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Godara Ka Bas, Singnor, Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan. 24. Kalpana Choudhary D/o Sagar Mal Choudhary, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Near Railway Phatak Kishangarh, Renwal Jaipur, Rajasthan. 25. Kalpana Choudhary D/o Goverdhan Singh Choudhary, Aged About 42 Years, R/o House No. 61, Anand Complex Near Power House, Eklingpura, Girwa, Udaipur Rajasthan. 26. Kamlesh Kumar Khator S/o Radheshyam Khator, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Main Market Gilund, Relmagra, Rajsamand, Rajasthan. 27. Kamlesh Kumar Rangera S/o Sardar Mal Rangera, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Shivram Ka Baspost Kotri Simrala, Shrimadhopur, Sikar Rajasthan. 28. Kanhaiya Lal Merotha S/o Heera Lal Merotha, Aged [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (37 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] About 35 Years, R/o Kherli Kalya, Post Dungarajya, Digod, Kota Rajasthan. 29. Karan Kumar Jat S/o Udai Lal Jat, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Nayagaon Post Sarana, Mandalganj, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 30. Lalit Sharma S/o Jawari Lal Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 38 Balaji Nagar, Rawala Bera, Mata Ka Than Main Road Puliya, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 31. Lalita Kumari, D/o Veerbhan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Plot No. 54, Road No. 3, Nirman Nagar Post Shyamnagar, Jaipur, Distt. Jaipur Rajasthan. 32. Lalu Ram Mali, S/o Ghisa Lal Mali, Aged About 36 Years, R/o (C/o) Nand Lal Gupta, Chandra Colony, Madanganj, Kishangarh, Rajasthan. 33. Mahendra Kumar Sharma S/o Hanuman Sahai Sharma, Aged About 37 Years, R/o 171/33 Pratpnagar Jaipur Rajasthan. 34. Mahendra Patel S/o Sohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 31/184 Aaimata Nagar Near Gattani Hospital Khokharia, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 35. Manish Kumar Goyal S/o Shyam Sundar Goyal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vaidhya Colony, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. 36. Manish Jangir S/o Nand Kishor Jangid, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Puranabas, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Rajasthan. 37. Manisha D/o Durga Das, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Gopal Das Colony, Near Mahawar Bhawan Matour Road, Khairthal, Kishangarh Bas Alwar Rajasthan. 38. Manisha Ameta D/o Madan Lal Ameta, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 207, Star Residency Sikar Rajasthan. 39. Manju Meena D/o Ramkirpal Meena, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Plot No. 30, Bhoogor By Pass Alwar, Rajasthan. 40. Manphool Singh Bishoni S/o Gemper Ram Bishnoi, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Shriram Nagar, Post Jamba Tehsil Bap District Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 41. Manraj Singh Gurjar S/o Ram Lal Gurjar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Kanwarpura, Deoli, Tonk Rajasthan. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (38 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 42. Mohan Singh Dhakar S/o Kalla Ram Dhakar, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 65-Arya Nagar, Murlipura Jaipur, Rajasthan. 43. Monika Sain D/o Rohitash Kumar Sain, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 59, New Friends Colony, Alwar, Rajasthan. 44. Mukesh Kumar Jat S/o Shiv Lal Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vp Lakhola, Teshil Shahda District Bhilwara, State Rajasthan. 45. Mukesh Verma S/o Pali Ram Bunkar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Out Of Churu Gate, Ward No. 34, Ambedkar Colony, Ramgarh Shekhawati, Sikar, Rajasthan. 46. Namrata Kumawat D/o Brahma Nand, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ward No. 7, Behind Shastri School, R/o Neem Ka Thana, Sikar, Rajasthan. 47. Narendra Chipha S/o Rajendra Prasad, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Charan Singh Nawalgarh Road, Sikar, Rajasthan. 48. Naveen Bhati S/o Nenu Ram Bhati, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 27 Laddha Colony, Loco Road, Ratanda, Jodhpur. 49. Nayantara Joshi D/o Rajkumar Joshi, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 13 Rawali Talab Road, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar. 50. Om Prakash S/o Bhagirath, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vpo Bhamasi, Churu, Rajasthan. 51. Om Prakash S/o Munni Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Ward No. 7, Adarah Colony, Anoopgarh, Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. 52. Pavan Prakash Kumawat S/o Murlidhar Kumawat, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Oswali Mohalla Madanganj, Kishangarh, Ajmer, Rajasthan. 53. Pawan Kumar Maru S/o Chunni Lal Maru, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Kushalgarh, Banswara, Rajasthan. 54. Pawan Phatak S/o Purushottam Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Near Psc School Ashok Vihar Colony, Jain Mandir Road New Mandi, Hindaun City, Distt. Karauli, Rajasthan. 55. Pooja Kumawat D/o Om Prakash Kumawat, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Pareek Colony Kuchaman City Nagaur [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (39 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Rajasthan. 56. Poonam D/o Vidhadhar Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 13, Shastri Nagar, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 57. Poonam Saini D/o Mahesh Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Behind Kali Tanki, Near Railway Station Ratangarh, Churu Rajasthan. 58. Poonam Verma D/o Gyan Prakash Verma, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Svn School Ke Paas, Street No.2, Rampura, Lalgar, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 59. Poonam Yadav D/o Sunder Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Aamarsar Post Sirsala, Bhuana, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 60. Prakash Choudhary S/o Shyoji Ram Jat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Near Head Post Office, Ward No. 05, Shrimadhopur, Sikar Rajasthan. 61. Preeti Parmar D/o Pooran Singh Parmar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Behind Kela Mata Mandir Maharaj Bag Bari Dholpur, Rajasthan. 62. Priyanka Rajpurohit D/o Sawai Singh Rajpurohit, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Near Govt. Hospital Shiv Colony, Village Ras Jaitran District Pali, Rajasthan. 63. Radha Kishan Khoiwal S/o Daya Shankar Khoiwal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o B-392, Panchmukhi Coloni, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 64. Rajesh Kumar Salvi S/o Durga Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Diwer, Bhim, Rajsamand, Rajasthan. 65. Rajkumar Saini S/o Lallu Ram Saini, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Pili Ki Talai, Near Water Tank, Kunda, Amber Jaipur Rajasthan. 66. Rajpal Meel S/o Sultan Singh Meel, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Badusar, Laxmangarh, Sikar, Rajasthan. 67. Rakesh Kumar Khatik S/o Kistur Mal Khatik, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Kalyanpura, Post Dhikola, Shahpura, Bhilwara Rajasthan. 68. Rakhi Roy D/o Lalit Roy, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Swami Viveknand Government Model School Dudu, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 69. Raman Muwal S/o Ranjeet Singh, Aged About 35 Years, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (40 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] R/o Vpo Jerthi District Sikar Dhod, Sikar Rajasthan. 70. Ramesh Chand Kumawat S/o Badri Narayan Kumawat, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Boraj (Bhagaton Ka Mohalla) Via Phulera, Tehsil Mauzamabad, Jaipur Rajasthan. 71. Ramesh Chandra Sharma S/o Ganpat Lal Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Surpura Post Bagawas, Viratnagar, Jaipur Rajasthan. 72. Ravindra Kumar S/o Ram Niwash, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Jhanjhot Post Khudot, Chirawa, Jhunjhunu. 73. Reena Choudhary D/o Surendra Kumar Choudhary, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Dt-07 Block 02 Jk Gram Emdi Rajsamand Rajasthan. 74. Reshpal Saini S/o Dhansingh Saini, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vpo Rambas Tehsil Govindgarh, District Alwar, Rajasthan. 75. Ritika Punwaniya D/o Khemchand Punwaniya, Aged About 31 Years, R/o House No1 B 476, Kudi Bhagtasni Housing Board, Luni, Jodhpur (Rajasthan) 76. Rohitash Yogi S/o Rajendra Prasad Yogi, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Simarla Jagir, Shrimadhopur, Sikar, Rajasthan. 77. Saavya Shilla D/o Dariya Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 10/321, Malviya Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur Rajasthan. 78. Sandeep Kumar S/o Kedar Mal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Parasrampura, Tehsil Nawalgarh District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. 79. Sandeep Kumar Sharma S/o Mishri Lal Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 51, Kumharo Ka Vas, Sumerpur District Pali, Rajasthan. 80. Saroj Meel D/o Ramsukh Meel, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Fakirpura, Post Kasli Block Dhod, District Sikar. 81. Satveer Yadav S/o Mohan Lal Yadav, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Mangalwa Post Rampur Tehsil Bansur District Alwar Rajasthan. 82. Satya Prakash Singhal S/o Vidya Sagar Gupta, Aged About 37 Years, R/o 86 Balmandir Colony, Sawai Madhopur Rajasthan. 83. Satyapal Yadav S/o Mukhram Yadav, Aged About 34 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (41 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Years, R/o Mundiakhera Mundawar, Alwar Rajasthan. 84. Savita Gared D/o Dinesh Gared, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Plot No.1 Balaji Mod Sirsi Road, Jaipur. 85. Savita Meena D/o Prahlad Ram Meena, Aged About 34 Years, R/o 2G3 Mahaveer Nagar Extension, Kota Ladpura, Kota Rajasthan. 86. Shiv Raj S/o Madan Lal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Ransisar Charana Didwana, Nagaur, Rajasthan. 87. Shivansh Dixit S/o J.p. Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 2/288 Kala Kian Housing Board Alwar, Rajasthan. 88. Smita Saini D/o Pyare Lal Saini, Aged About 33 Years, R/o C-320 Malviya Nagar, Sanganer Jaipur Rajasthan. 89. Sonam Meena D/o Ram Kalyan Meena, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 7, Keshav Nagar, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. 90. Sonu Kothari S/o Durga Lal Kothari, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Rawla Chowk Sanganer, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 91. Subhash Kumar Saini S/o Kalu Ram Saini, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Veer Hanuman Ji Ka Rasta, Ward No. 43, Chomu Jaipur Rajasthan. 92. Sudarshan Vaghela S/o Pooran Mal Vaghela, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 40, Surya Colony Naya Gaon Road, Pali Rajasthan. 93. Sudhir Singh Kaler S/o Pit Ram Kaler, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Chouradi Athuni Post Bibasar Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan. 94. Sulochana D/o Banwari Lal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o 369-A, Ekta Path, Vidhyut Nagar, Gate No. 8, Sarathi Marg, Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Raj.) 95. Suman Kumari D/o Onkar Mal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Out Side Of Churu Gate, Near Ramdev Ji Temple, Ramgarh Shekhawati, Sikar Rajasthan. 96. Sumer Chand Jangir S/o Birbal Ram Jangir, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Bakara, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan. 97. Sunil Kumar Rabia S/o Mahesh Kumar Rabia, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Nabipura Tehsil Fatehpur District Sikar Rajasthan. 98. Suresh Kumar S/o Harwanta Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No.1, Sutharon Ka Bas Genhun Road, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (42 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Fatehpur Sikar Rajasthan. 99. Udit Prabha Sharma S/o Mr. Dinesh Chand Sharma, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mansarovar Colony Near Bus Stand Rajgarh Alwar Rajasthan. 100. Vani Dubey D/o Ramakant Dubey, Aged About 37 Years, R/o C/o Shyam Manohar Near Marugarh, Jodhpur, Jodhpur Rajasthan. 101. Vasudev Sukhwal S/o Kailash Chandra, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Baghana Teshil Bhim District Rajsamand Rajasthan 102. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Ramgopal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Khanpur Meena, Bari Dholpur, Rajasthan. 103. Vikash S/o Bahadur Mal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Shiv Singh Pura, Post Pacheri Bari Buhana, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan. 104. Vinay Kumar Mishra S/o Raj Kishor Mishra, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Bara Kumedan Sahab Bajariya Road, Dholpur, Rajasthan. 105. Vineeta Singh D/o Shishupal Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vpo Jejusar, Nawal Garh, Jhunjhunu Rajasthan. 106. Yashpal Singh S/o Pal Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Radha Devi House No 8 Behind Police Line,meeranagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan. 107. Kamlapati Varma S/o Bhupendra Kumar Varma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 68, Gandhi Nagar, Section 9 L Ward No. 38, Hanuman Garh Junction District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan) 108. Poonam Sharma D/o Shyam Sundar Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Kuchaman Tehsil Nawa, District Nagaur (Rajasthan) 109. Shankar Lal Jat Son Of Shri Ram Dhan Jat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Taswariya Bansa, Tehsil Phooliya District Bhilwara (Rajasthan) 110. Yashbala Parihar D/o Ram Kumar Parihar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Plot No. 49-A, Shanti Colony Airport Ke Saamne Khokawas, Sanganer, Distt. Jaipur (Raj.) 111. Jalaludin S/o Iqbal Hussain, Aged About 39 Years, R/o [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (43 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Karpura Mohalla, Ajmeri Gate Ke Pass, Nagaur. 112. Herminder Kaur S/o Gurdev Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 30 Multan Mangal Alwar Rajasthan. 113. Ankit Choudhary S/o Kiran Pal Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o House No. 157, Ganpati Nagar, Sooariya Road, Kota Ladpura, Kota. ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief Secretary, Deaprtment Of Secondary Education. Govt. Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secreatriat, Jaipur, Rajasthan . 2. The Director, Board Of Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 3. The Joint Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1488/2023 URN: CW / 2808U / 2023 1. Dr. Ram Swaroop Jat S/o Sh. Mangla Ram Jat, R/o Vill Moondwara Post Sinodiya Via Jobner Dist Jaipur 2. Pawan Kumar Kalal S/o Sh. Moti Lal, R/o B - 271 Malviya Nagar Jaipur 3. Kailash Chandra Meena S/o Sh. Girraj Prasad Meena, R/o A - 94 Main Road Ganipur Vill Ganipur Teh Sikrai Dist Dausa 4. Praveen Kumar Jangid S/o Sh. Mahaveer Prasad Khati, R/o Vill Saroli Post Juniya Teh Dooni Dist Tonk 5. Ajeet Singh Awana S/o Sh. Hemraj Awana, R/o Vill Neemali Thes Sainthal Dist Dausa 6. Amit Kumar S/o Sh. Keshari Lal, R/o Vpo Dhamora Teh Udaipurwati Dist Jhunjhunu 7. Amit Kumar Khorania S/o Sh. Moti Lal Khorania, R/o Vpo Rojari Teh Phulera Dist Jaipur 8. Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Kishna Ram, R/o Vill Kandhran Post Thanamathui Teh Rajgarh Dist Churu 9. Anil Kumar Upadhyaya S/o Sh. Shyam Lal Upadhyaya, R/o B 71 Sunscity Near Arjiya Chorha Bhilwara [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (44 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 10. Anita Kumari Yadav D/o Sh. Ramji Lal Yadav, R/o Vill Gurgachaka Post Nangal Salia Teh Kotkasim Dist Alwar 11. Arvind Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Sanval Ram Meena, R/o Vpo Mandawari, Teh. Lalsot Dist Dausa 12. Asha Ram S/o Sh. Shethu Ram, R/o Vpo Chhila Teh Lohawat Dist Jodhpur 13. Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Mool Chand, R/o Ward 28 Kali Bhatta Ke Pas Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 14. Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Omprakash, R/o Vpo Hasampur Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 15. Ashok Kumar Kuri S/o Sh. Mali Ram Kuri, R/o Vpo Reengus Teh Reengus Dist Sikar 16. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Mool Chand Meena, R/o Vpo Jatwara Teh Bassi Dist Jaipur 17. Ashutosh Singh S/o Sh. Naresh Singh Pal, R/o Ward No 9 P O Taranagar Dist Churu 18. Ashwini Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Ramavtar Sharma, R/o Plot No 46 Parshuram Nagar Near C M Place Churu 19. Asif Khan S/o Sh. Basir Khan, R/o Ward No 21 Mangla Colony Churu 20. Bhagwat Prasad Jangid S/o Sh. Murari Lal Jangid, Aged About 34 Years, A Santosh Nagar Baran Road Kota 21. Bhanwar Lal S/o Sh. Hari Ram Vishnoi, R/o Vill Vagawas Post Jatu Tel Bagoda Jalor 22. Bhanwar Lal Budaniyan S/o Sh. Mukh Ram Budaniyan, R/o Vill Gajsar Post Ghantel Dist Churu 23. Bhanwara Ram Thalor S/o Sh. Birda Ram, R/o Vill Khuri Nimbi Post Barangana Teh Didwana Dist Nagaur 24. Bheru Lal Jat S/o Sh. Nathu Lal Jat, R/o Vpo Bheemgarh Teh Rashmi Dist Chittorgarh 25. Bhoop Singh Poonia S/o Sh. Bhader Ram, R/o Vill Sardarpura Khalsa Post Kanwani Teh Rawatsar Dist Hanumangarh 26. Bhoor Singh Meena S/o Sh. Ram Singh Meena, R/o Vpo Ganwadi Meena Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli 27. Chandra Shekhar Meena S/o Sh. Jassu Ram Meena, R/o Vpo Sirohi Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 28. Charan Singh S/o Sh. Om Prakash, R/o Vill Bhagwan [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (45 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Post Daidas Teh Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 29. Chena Ram S/o Sh. Bhanwar Singh, R/o Vill Kurli Teh Didwana Dist Nagaur 30. Chetan Prakash Saini S/o Sh. Mali Ram Saini, R/o Vpo Mawanda Khurd Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 31. Damodar Prasad Verma S/o Sh. Sohan Lal Verma, R/o Vpo Ringas Teh Shri Madhopur Dist Sikar 32. Deshraj Gurjar S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Gurjar, Vill Daulaj R/o Post Tevori Teh Viratnagar Dist Jaipur 33. Dharmendra Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Jagram Meena, R/o 127 Kanga Patti Shyampur Mundawari Post Mahu Ghonsla Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli 34. Dharmendra Maurya S/o Sh. Ram Swaroop Maurya, R/o Vill Shriya Post Amarabad Teh Ramgarh Pachawara Dist Dausa 35. Dinesh Kumar Mal S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Mal, R/o Vpo Delwara Lokiya, Teh Ghatol Dist Banswara 36. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Mohanlal Meena, R/o Vpo Terrath Teh Talera Dist Bundi 37. Durga Singh Gaud S/o Sh. Bhagwan Singh, R/o Vill Gourpura (Nabipura) Post Beswa Teh Fatehpur Dist Sikar 38. Gajender Kumar S/o Sh. Dharamveer Yadav, R/o Vill Narera Khurd Post Aklimpur Teh Neemrana Dist Alwar 39. Ganesh Lal Meghwa S/o Sh. Uday Lal Meghwal, R/o Nainwa Road Indra Colony Bundi 40. Giriraj Prasad Sharma S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Sharma, R/o Vpo Pragpura Teh Paota Dist Jaipur 41. Govind Krishana Swami S/o Sh. Murlidhar Swami, R/o Vill Pirer Post Jaitsisar Teh Sardharshahar Dist Churu 42. Hanuman Choudhary S/o Sh. Jeetmal Mudel, R/o Ward No 2 Marwar, Mundel, Dist Nagaur 43. Hari Charan Meena S/o Sh. Murari Lal Meena, R/o Vill Khedi Ghatam Post Jhareda Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli 44. Hari Ram Yadav S/o Sh. Laxminarayan Yadav, R/o Vpo Khedi Milak Teh Kishangarh Renwal Dist Jaipur 45. Harkesh Meena S/o Sh. Narayan Lal Meena, R/o Vpo Salempura Teh Rahuwas Dist Dausa [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (46 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 46. Harphool Jat S/o Sh. Kana Ram, R/o Dhani Gainanowali Bhandhawala Bhopalpura Post Guhala Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 47. Hemlata Kumawat D/o Sh. Chothmal Kumawat, R/o 88 Krishna Nagar Officer Inclave Jhotwara Jaipur 48. Hemraj Mahawar S/o Sh. Gopal Lal, R/o Vpo Didawana Near Govt Sr Sec School Didwana Teh Lalsot Dist Dausa 49. Hira Lal Prajapat S/o Sh. Shankar Lal, R/o Vill Johar Khera Post Beawar Khas Via Beawar Dist Ajmer 50. Jagdish Chandra S/o Sh. Ami Lal, R/o Vpo Deeplana Teh Nohar Dist Hanuumangarh 51. Jai Kishan Meena S/o Sh. Hari Ram Meena, R/o Vpo Thanagazi Teh Thanagazi Dist Alwar 52. Jairam Meena S/o Sh. Dhansi Ram Meena, R/o Vpo Ballupura Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 53. Jaypal Singh Rana S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Rana, R/o Vpo Borda Teh Ganoda Dist Banswara 54. Jeevan Lal Verma S/o Sh. Ram Sahaya Balai, R/o Vpo Agar Teh Thanagazi Dist Alwar 55. Jitendra Choudhary S/o Sh. Gopi Lal Choudhary, R/o Nagliya Mod Post Gadriyawas Teh Dharyawad Dist Pratapgarh 56. Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Manohar Lal Sharma, R/o Vill Tahatada Post Jatwara Teh Bassi Dist Jaipur 57. Kailash Chand Jat S/o Sh. Ram Kishor, R/o Vill Ramnagar Post Aliyari Teh Todaraisingh Dist Tonk 58. Kamlesh Kumar Jat S/o Sh. Bhagwan Sahai Jat, R/o Vpo Singod Khurd Teh Chomu Dist Jaipur 59. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Prabhu Dayal Meena, R/o Vill Galawas Post Jodhula Via Maid Dist Jaipur. 60. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Rampratap Meena, R/o Vill Udaipura Post Chudiyawas, Teh Nangal Rajawatan, Dist Dausa 61. Karan Singh S/o Sh. Kishor Kumar, R/o Vill Tanwra Ki Dhani Post Santhalpur Teh Bansur Dist Alwar 62. Karan Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Ramraj Gurjar, R/o Vill Arpura Teh Bamanwas Dist Sawai Madhopur 63. Karansingh Charpota S/o Sh. Prakash Chandra [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (47 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Charpota, R/o Vill Nanikasath Post Lohariya Bada Teh Kushalgarh Dist Banswara 64. Kedar Lal Meena S/o Sh. Ram Sahay Meena, R/o Vill Medkapura Post Kheda Jamalpur Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli 65. Kuldeep Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Mahesh Narayan Sharma, R/o Parshuram Colony Behind Hospital Rajgarh Alwar 66. Lal Chand Deegwal S/o Sh. Mukunda Ram Deegwal, R/o Vpo Divrala Teh Shrimadhopur Dist Sikar 67. Lal Chand Verma S/o Sh. Prahalad Ram Verma, R/o Vpo Kariri Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur 68. Lokendra Kalal S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Kalal, R/o Hari Om Nagar Vill Kushalmagri Post Bildi Dist Dungarpur 69. Lokesh Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Ramesh Chandra Sharma, R/o Vpo Chauth Ka Barwara Dist Sawai Madhopur 70. Madan Lal Bhahada S/o Sh. Kalu Ram Bhahada, R/o Vill Kanwarasa Post Kajipura Via Sambhar Lake Dist Jaipur 71. Mahendra Jajra S/o Sh. Gordhan Ram, R/o Vpo Sinod Teh And Dist Nagaur 72. Mahendra Kumar S/o Sh. Ganga Ram Harijan, R/o Vill Basai Beerthal Post Machhroli Teh Kishangarh Bas Dist Alwar 73. Mahendra Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Bhairun Ram Yadav, R/o Vill I Dhan Ka Bas Post Pachar Via Kalwar Dist Jaipur 74. Mahendra Singh Palawat S/o Sh. Gauri Dan Singh, R/o Vill Charanwas Post Karansar Via Renwal Dist Jaipur 75. Mahesh Chand Meena S/o Sh. Gopi Ram Meena, R/o Vill Bisuni Post Bamanwas Chaugan Teh Thanagazi Dist Alwar 76. Mahesh Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Mangu Ram Yadav, R/o Vpo Nathi Ka Bas Tahsil Kinangarh Renwal Jaipur 77. Makkhan Lal Singer S/o Sh. Bal Ram Singer, R/o Vpo Abhawas Khandela Dist Sikar 78. Mala Ram S/o Sh. Jetha Ramarjiyana, R/o Teh Siwana Dist Badmer 79. Mali Ram Yadav S/o Sh. Umrav Yadav, R/o Vpo Bagawas [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (48 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Ahiran Teh Virat Nagar Dist Jaipur 80. Maliram Yadav S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Yadav, R/o Vpo Sirsali Teh Amer Dist Jaipur 81. Manju Lata D/o Sh. Mohan Lal Dotaniya, R/o B 25 Hasan Kha Mewat Nagar Dist Alwar 82. Manoj Kumar S/o Sh. Mohan Lal, R/o Vpo Nand Teh Malsisar Dist Jhunjhunu 83. Manoj Kumar S/o Sh. Dayanand Singh, R/o B 185 Sector -1 Sainik Basti Churu 84. Manoj Kumar Ojha S/o Sh. Bhawani Shanker Ojha, R/o Vpo Kanechhan Kalan Teh Fuliya Kalan Dist Bhilwara 85. Meetha Lal Meena S/o Sh. Gopi Lal Meena, R/o Vill Khajura Post Karwar Teh Nainwa Dist Bundi 86. Meghram Meena S/o Sh. Mani Ram Meena, R/o Vpo Katkar (Musayare) Teh Hindaun City Dist Karauli 87. Mohan Lal Kalkal S/o Sh. Bhagirath Prasad Kakal, R/o Vpo Rampura Bass Teh And Dist Churu 88. Mohan Lal Meena S/o Sh. Bhagwan Sahay Meena, R/o Vill Khijuriya Tiwadiyan Post Khatepura Teh Bassi Dist Jaipur 89. Mohit Singh S/o Sh. Mahendra Singh, R/o Vpo Karnikot Teh Mundawar Dist Alwar 90. Mukesh Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Karan, R/o Ward No 30 Near Govt College Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 91. Mukesh Kumar Bhahada S/o Sh. Kalu Ram Bhahada, R/o Vill Kanwarasa Post Kajipura Via Sambhar Lake Dist Jaipur 92. Mukesh Kumar Kunderwal S/o Sh. Roopnarayan Choudhary, R/o Vpo Pt No 52 Subhash Nagar Sarpanch Colony Tonk 93. Mukesh Kumar Nagar S/o Sh. Shyoji Lal Nagarv, R/o Toda Ka Gothra Post Sitapura Tehsil Deoli Tonk 94. Mukesh Kumar Yadav S/o Sh. Omkar Mal, R/o Vill Rajpura Post Bidara Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur 95. Nagendra Singh Yadav S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand Yadav, R/o Vill Rendayal Turk Post Rendayal Gurjar Teh Wazirpur Dist Sawai Madhopur 96. Nand Kishor Meena S/o Sh. Manohar Lal Meena, R/o Vpo [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (49 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Kalwan Teh Sikrai Dist Dausa 97. Naresh Kumar Bagoriya S/o Sh. Nathu Lal Regar, R/o Vpo Mandfiya Teh Bhadesar Dist Chittorgarh 98. Naveen Kumar Danewa S/o Sh. Pramod Kumar Danewa, R/o Vpo Bharu Dist Jhunjhunu. 99. Neelkamal Sharma S/o Sh. Subhash Chand Sharma, R/o Vpo Tehla Teh Tehla Dist Alwar 100. Neemba Ram Parihar S/o Sh. Bhoora Ram Parihar, R/o Vill Dudabery Post Malwa Teh And Dist Badmer 101. Neeraj Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Kalyan Prasad Meena, R/o Vpo Kamalpura Teh Todabhim Dist Karauli 102. Neeraj Meena S/o Sh. Shri Jai Lal Meena, R/o 203 Logpat Nagar Jagatpura Jaipur 103. Nitesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Sh. Babulal Kumawat, R/o Vpo Asalpur Teh Phulera Dist Jaipur 104. Om Prakash Gurjar S/o Sh. Rura Ram Gurjar, R/o Vill Peplod Narayan Dhani Redan Post Devipura Teh Sahpura Dist Jaipur 105. Phoolchand Verma S/o Sh. Badri Lal Verma, R/o Vpo Khanpur Shitala Mata Chauk Teh Khanpur Dist Jhalawar 106. Prahlad Gujer S/o Sh. Ramswaroop Gujer, R/o Vpo Khandar Dist Sawai Madhopur 107. Prakash Chand S/o Sh. Narayan Lal, R/o Gopal Bhavan Suriya Colony Post Ranoli Teh Dantaramgarh Dist Sikar 108. Pramod Kumar Yaduvanshi S/o Sh. Brijmohan Yaduvanshi, R/o Vill Mothpur Post Kalmanda Teh Dist Baran 109. Prashant Choudhary S/o Sh. Ram Niwas Choudhary, R/o H N 121 Dhiv Bhakto Ki Gali Vill Dohariya 110. Praveen Kumar Biban S/o Sh. Shishpal Singh, R/o Ward No 30 Near N D B College Professor Colony Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 111. Preeti Kanwar S/o Sh. Bhagat Singh, R/o 71 A Piyush Path Kailash Nagar Jhotwara Jaipur 112. Prem Kumar S/o Sh. Madan Lal, R/o Sonari Road Ward No 9 Near Aashmin Video Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 113. Priyanka Gothawal S/o Sh. Shiv Pal Singh, R/o Ward No 14 Bhebha Ram Nagar Colony Pathwari Ka Mohalla [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (50 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 114. Raghunandan Pancholi S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma, R/o Vpo Ghar Teh Dooni Dist Tonk 115. Rajender Prasad S/o Sh. Duni Ram, R/o Vpo Deidas Teh Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 116. Rajender Singh S/o Sh. Sube Singh Yadav, R/o Vill Jajor Ka Bass, Post Kithoor, Teh And Dist Alwar 117. Rajendra Dhakad S/o Sh. Omprakash Nagar, R/o Vill Bawdi Kheda Post Khopar Teh Chhabra Dist Baran 118. Rajendra Kumar S/o Sh. Kani Ram Paliwal, R/o Vpo Chhila Teh Lohawat Dist Jodhpur 119. Rajendra Singh Yadav S/o Sh. Mahaveer Prasad Yadav, R/o D-1-10 Madhukar Garh Colony Kotputali Dist Jaipur 120. Rajesh Dhenwal S/o Sh. Kishan Lal Dhenwal, R/o P No 13A Acfc Colony Ratnada Jodhpur 121. Rajesh Kumar S/o Sh. Ramawtar, R/o Vpo Khohari Tehsil Bansur Dist Alwar 122. Rajesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Tejpal, R/o Plot No 90 B Shiv Watika Colony Govindpura Kalwar Road Jaipur 123. Rajesh Pareek S/o Sh. Bhairu Lal Pareek, R/o H N No 40 Near Kashipuri Shyam Mandir Shastri Nagar Bhilwara 124. Raju Jajoriya S/o Sh. Ramdev Jajoriya, R/o Vill Bairawas Post Bane Ka Barkhera Teh Dausa Dist Dausa 125. Raju Ram Prajapat S/o Sh. Shreechand Prajapat, R/o Ward No 8 Lunkaransar Teh Lunkaransar Dist Bikaner 126. Rajveer Poonia S/o Sh. Shyopal Singh, R/o Vpo Meharadasi Via Mandawa Jhunjhunu. 127. Ram Niwas Kaswan S/o Sh. Bhinwa Ram, R/o Vill Kaswan Ki Dhani Post Maroth Teh Nawa Dist Nagaur 128. Ram Pal S/o Sh. Raja Ram, R/o Vpo Peerkamria Teh Tibbi Dist Hanumangarh 129. Ram Prakash Meena S/o Sh. Rang Lal Meena, R/o B 97 Malviya Nagar Alwar 130. Ramesh Kumar S/o Sh. Shri Om Prakash Khichar, R/o Chakbash Post Bharu Teh Mandawa Jhunjhunu 131. Ramesh Kumar Bunkar S/o Sh. Durga Prasad Bunkar, R/o Vpo Gudlia Via Badhal Teh Chomu Dist Jaipur [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (51 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 132. Ramji Lal Bairwa S/o Sh. Lakshmi Narayan Bairwa, R/o Vill Jailampura Post Khanwas Teh Lawan Dist Dausa 133. Ramkaran Jat S/o Sh. Chhitar Mal Jat, R/o Vill Maheshpura Post Jairampura Teh Amer Dist Jaipur 134. Ratan Lal Meena S/o Sh. Shrikishan Meena, R/o Vill Bhaglai, The And Dist. Dausa 135. Ravi Kumar Sirawata S/o Sh. Rameshwar Lal, R/o Surya Nagar Po Losal Dist Sikar 136. Ravi Prakash Meena S/o Sh. Ratti Ram Meena, R/o Vpo Shafipura Tehsil Bamanwas District Sawai Madhopur 137. Ravindra Kumar S/o Sh. Mamla Ram Jatav, R/o Vill Chakoliya Post Mator Teh Mundawar Dist Alwar 138. Ravindra Kumar Ray S/o Sh. Amar Singh Jatav, R/o Vpo Baragma Teh Shri Mahavirji Dist Karauli 139. Sahil Choudhary S/o Sh. Kailash Choudhary, R/o Vpo Khoraladkhani Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur 140. Sanjay Choudhary S/o Sh. Kalu Ram Choudhary, R/o Vill Tatiyawas Post Rampura Teh Amer Dist Jaipur 141. Sanjay Jain S/o Sh. Bheru Lal Jain, R/o Vpo Kherot Ram Mandir Ke Pas Teh And Dist Pratapgarh 142. Satish Chand Mahawar S/o Sh. Vishvmbhar Mahawar, R/o Vill Khanpur Post Kariri Teh Todabhim Dist Karauli 143. Satya Pal S/o Sh. Ram Chandra, R/o Vpo Kaswali Teh Laxmangarh Dist Sikar 144. Satyawati S/o Sh. Chetan Lal Morodia, R/o Vpo Neemrana Teh Neemrana Dist Alwar 145. Seema Kumari Yadav D/o Sh. Mahesh Kumar Yadav, R/o Chomu Dist Jaipur 146. Shankar Lal Meena S/o Sh. Shri Parta Ram Meena, R/o Vill Padak Chhali Post Pratapgarh Teh Thanagazi Dist Alwar 147. Shiv Prasad Meena S/o Sh. Ram Swaroop Meena, R/o Vpo Dhanawar Teh Baswa Dist Dausa 148. Sohan Lal Verma S/o Sh. Chiranji Lal Verma, R/o 295 Jata Pada Purani Tonk Dist Tonk 149. Subhash S/o Sh. Mansingh, R/o Vpo Baijuwa Teh Rajgarh Dist Churu 150. Subhash Kumar S/o Sh. Bhagirath Mal, R/o Dhani [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (52 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Sutliya Wali Post Jalpali Teh Shrimadhopur Dist Sikar 151. Subhash Poonia S/o Sh. Ramchandra Poonia, R/o Vill Shyopura Post Depalsar Teh Dist Churu 152. Sumer Singh Kalash S/o Sh. Maru Ram Kalash, R/o Dhani Burganala Ki Vpo Jeelo Teh Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 153. Sumit Kumar Jat S/o Sh. Nand Lal Jat, R/o Vpo Sodawas Teh Mundawar Dist Alwar 154. Sunil Dayal S/o Sh. Shimbhu Dayal, R/o Ward No 11 Neem Ka Thana Dist Sikar 155. Sunil Kumar Haidiya S/o Sh. Kajor Mal, R/o D 303 Jagdamba Nagar Behind Heerapura Power House Ajmer Road Jaipur 156. Sunil Meena S/o Sh. Girraj Prasad Meena, R/o Vill Arniya Post Nogav Teh Gangapur City Dist Sawai Madhopur 157. Sunita Choudhary D/o Sh. Suraj Mal Choudhary, R/o Vill Kapdiyawas Post Durjniyawas Teh Kalwar Jhotwara Jaipur 158. Surendra Kumar S/o Sh. Yad Ram Yadav, R/o Vill Rasulpur, Post Pacheri Bari Teh Buhana Dist Jhunjhunu 159. Surendra Kumar Badesar S/o Sh. Surta Ram, R/o Vpo Gorir Teh Khetri Dist Jhunjhunu 160. Surendra Singh Samota S/o Sh. Rameshwar Lal Samota, R/o Vill Trilokpura Post Sihodi Teh Shrimadhopur Dist Sikar 161. Suresh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Ram Lal Meena, R/o Plot No 140 (S.w.b) Naya Bass Dist Alwar 162. Suresh Kumar Todawata S/o Sh. Kalu Ram, R/o Vill Boythawalw Jhotwara Jaipur Dist Jaipur 163. Suresh Yadav S/o Sh. Mangal Chand Yadav, R/o 20, Rathore Marg, Vivekanand Colony, Naya Khera, Ambabari, Jaipur. 164. Swati Choudhary D/o Sh. Begraj Singh, R/o Vpo Abusar Teh Jhunjhunu Dist Jhunjhunu 165. Tshayp Singh S/o Sh. Omprakash Yadav, R/o Vill Kani (Tigaon) Post Jonal Teh Kotkasim Dist Alwar 166. Umesh Kumar Kumawat S/o Sh. Shri Rampal Kumawat, R/o Vpo Manoharpur Teh Shahpura Dist Jaipur [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (53 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 167. Ummed Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Chhaju Lal Gurjar, R/o Vpo Torda Teh Baharawanda Dist Dauda 168. Veepi Singh D/o Sh. Shri Rambeer Singh, R/o Vpo Kharagpur Teh Saipau Dist Dholpur 169. Vijay Singh S/o Sh. Mool Chand, R/o Ward 28 Kali Bhatta Ke Pas Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 170. Vikash Kumar S/o Sh. Surajbhan Mahala, R/o Vpo Jankipura Vaya Jajor Kheri Teh Khandela Dist Sikar 171. Vishnu Dev Meena S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Meena, R/o Rest House Road Mandrin Mohalla Rajgarh Dist Alwar 172. Yashpal Kumar Beniwal S/o Sh. Bajrang Lal Beniwal, R/o Plot No B 19 Sector No 4 Near Pankha Circle Senik Basti Churu 173. Yogesh Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Phool Chand Meena, R/o Vill Raopura Post Bhuranpura Jatan Teh Jamwaramgarh Dist Jaipur 174. Shailendra Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Sumer Singh Gurjar, R/o Vil Bhojpura Post Kailai Teh Sikrai Dist Dausa 175. Samunder Singh S/o Sh. Ada Ram, R/o Vpo Badbirana Teh Nohar Dist Hanumangarh 176. Amjad Khan Pathan S/o Sh. Chhitar Khan Pathan, R/o Vill Doongri Kalan Teh Jobner Dist Jaipur. 177. Babli Jatav D/o Shri Chand Jatav, Resident Of Vpo Alipur, Tehsil Bhusawar, Dist. Bharatpur. 178. Udai Singh Bhada S/o Sumer Singh Bhada, Resident Of House No. 39, Shorya Vatika Ext. Niwaru, Jothwara. 179. Anil Kumar Nagar S/o Kishan Gopal Nagar, Village Nagarganj, Post Balapura, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi. 180. Ram Niwas Gurjar S/o Keshar Lal Gurjar, Resident Of Kanwarpura, Post Niwariya, Tehsil Deoli, District Tonk. 181. Bhanwar Lal Ghasil S/o Laxman Ram Ghasil, Resident Of Village Murlipura, District Jaipur. 182. Gajendra Singh S/o Sh Sardar Singh, Resident Of 10, Pahalwan Niwas, Geeta Colony, Near Msj College, Bharatpur. 183. Aaditya Sahoo S/o Sh Giriraj Sahoo, Village And Post Bamangaon, Tehsil Nainwa, Dist. Bundi. 184. Premveer S/o Sh Veermaram, Tehsil And District [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (54 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Barmer. 185. Manmohan Singh S/o Tejprakash Gurjar, Village And Post Mundota, Amer, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Director, Department Of Education, Bikaner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Bhandari, Sr. Adv., through V.C. assisted by Mr. Ankit Tater and Mr. Madhusudan Singh Rajpurohit. Dr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Adv. through V.C. assisted by Mr. Sachin Saraswat and Mr. Parikshit Singh Mr. Hanuman Singh, through V.C. Mr. Vivek Shrimali, through V.C. assisted by Ms. Yukti Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur, Sr. Adv., assisted by Mr. Divik Mathur and Mr. Harish Purohit Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG Mr. S.S. Rathore, AAG assisted by Mr. Yuvraj Singh Rathore. Mr. Tushar Thanvi for Mr. S.S. Ladrecha Mr. Vivek Shrimali (in SAW 461/23) assisted by Ms. Yukti Joshi Mr. C.S. Kotwani assisted by Mr. Abhijeet Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Judgment 1. Date of conclusion of Arguments 25.03.2026 2. Date on which the judgment was reserved 25.03.2026 3. Whether the full judgment or only operative part is pronounced Full 4. Date of pronouncement 08.07.2026 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (55 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Per, Justice Ravi Chirania:- Reportable 1. The instant batch of writ petitions has been filed by the petitioners, who were appointed as School Lecturers by the respondents pursuant to the advertisement dated 16.10.2015 issued by the respondent No. 3-Rajasthan Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘Commission’, for short) whereby several posts of School Lecturers in various subjects were advertised. Petitioners, being eligible, participated in the selection process for their respective subjects and their names were recommended by the Commission for appointment on different dates. Thereafter, the subject wise select lists were forwarded to the respondent–State Government, i.e. the Appointing Authority, which after completing necessary formalities, including document verification, issued subject-wise appointment orders. The petitioners were appointed on different dates during the period from October, 2016 to December, 2017. The issue as raised in these petitions was challenged and accordingly writ petitions and special appeals were filed at Principal Seat, Jodhpur as well as Bench at Jaipur. Details of the petitions as filed at the respective places are as under:- Filed at Principal Seat, Jodhpur S. No. Writ No. Title 1. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1408/2023 Poonam Soni @ Poonam Upadhyay v The State of Rajasthan 2. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 167/2023 Harihar Rajpurohit v The State of Rajasthan [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (56 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 3. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 246/2023 Pawan Kumar v The State of Rajasthan 4. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11975/2024 Sunil Choudhary v The State of Rajasthan 5. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 907/2023 Surendra v The State of Rajasthan 6. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1332/2023 Surendra Kumar v State of Rajasthan 7 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2012/2023 Kuldeep Choudhary v State of Rajasthan 8. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7146/2023 Suresh Kumar v State of Rajasthan 9. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 461/2023 State of Rajasthan v Ajay Kumar Rohila 10. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 119/2025 Madan Mohan Sharma v State of Rajasthan 11. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1323/2025 Ramniwas Bagria v The State of Rajasthan Filed at Bench at Jaipur S. No. Writ No. Title 1. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6281/2022 Sunil Mishra v State of Rajasthan 2. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 895/2023 Pradeep Kumar Khanagwal v The State of Rajasthan 3. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1488/2020 Dr. Ram Swaroop Jat v State of Rajasthan As the issue was common in all the above, so were ordered to be tagged and were listed before the Bench at Jaipur and were heard and decided together. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, after their appointment to the post of School Lecturer, they became eligible for promotion to the post of Vice Principal, for which usually a combined inter-se-seniority list is prepared by the respondents- State and thereafter, promotions are made on the basis of seniority list, which is prepared on the basis of respective merit as per applicable Rules. However, as the respondent failed to [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (57 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] prepare the inter-se-seniority list in a fair, proper and lawful manner as a result whereof, their seniority has been pushed down/adversely affected and also their year of selection has also been changed. It was contended that several candidates, who were either less meritorious or whose results were declared subsequent to those of the petitioners herein, have been assigned higher seniority in the list merely on the ground that their appointment orders were issued earlier to that of the petitioners herein by the respondent. 3. Since, the facts involved in all the petitions are common, therefore, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.246/2023 is taken as a lead case and the facts as mentioned in the case are taken for deciding the controversy involved in the present batch of petitions. DBCWP No.246/2023 4. The instant writ petition has been filed by fifteen petitioners, who acquired their respective degrees, applied for selection to the post of School Lecturer (Physics), pursuant to the advertisement dated 16.10.2015, which were stated to be correct and thereafter, appeared in the selection process and successfully cleared the same. 5. Mr. Manoj Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel submitted that they have made the following prayer in the writ petition:- “(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned proviso 1 to Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 with regard to the determination of seniority in the same selection to be made in accordance with the list prepared in Rules 28, may kindly be declared ultra vires the constitution of India and [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (58 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] be declared illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and be quashed and set aside. (ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annex-9) may kindly be ordered to be re-casted and modified and the seniority list in the present form, may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside. (iii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to assign seniority to the petitioners in accordance with their respective merit in each subject which should be the criteria for inter se seniority across different subjects included in one and the same selection process. (iv) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to provide merit as criteria for interlace seniority across different subjects recruited through one and same selection process; (v) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to prepare inter-se seniority list for the post of school Lecturer based upon merit the subjects for promotion to the posts of Vice-Principal. (vi) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to consider and promote the petitioners on the post of Vice-Principal with all consequential benefits from the date of less meritorious candidates across the subjects have been promoted as Vice-Principal. (vii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to prepare the inter se seniority list for the post of School Lecturer based upon the merit and subjects for promotion to the post of Vice-Principal and to consider and promote the petitioners on the post of Vice-Principal with all consequential benefits from the date of less meritorious candidates across [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (59 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] the subjects have been promoted as Vice-Principal with all consequential benefits and directions. (viii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to prepare the correct seniority list of School Lecturers by laying down appropriate criteria of assignment of seniority as per the Rules without giving emphasis on the date of sending the names/ lists by the RPSC to the appointing authority. (ix) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be restrained to hold any furthe promotions till the seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annex-9) is re-casted which has been issued for the years 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively and the respondents be restrained to hold DPC for the year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively on the post of Vice-Principal till the final disposal of the writ petition. (x) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. (xi) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.” 6. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Manoj Bhandari, submitted that the petitioners herein applied for the post of School Lecturer for subject (Physics), of which a total of 822 vacancies were advertised. He further submitted that the Commission declared the results for the subject (Physics) on 18.09.2016 and forwarded its recommendations to the State on 25.10.2016. The counseling was conducted on 03.11.2016/04.11.2016, however, the appointment orders could not be issued as the selection process came to be stalled on account stay in the pending [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (60 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] litigation pertaining to the selection process, before this Hon’ble High Court. 7. He further submitted that the result of certain other subjects, namely Political Science, English, Hindi, History, Commerce, Physics, Biology, Home Science, Geography, Sanskrit etc. were also challenged before the Hon’ble High Court, due to which, the entire selection process for those subjects also came to be stalled and therefore, the appointment orders could not be issued for all such subjects. As far as the remaining subjects are concerned namely, Rajasthani, Music, Sindhi, Mathematics, Philosophy, Drawing, Chemistry, the results and the selection process were not put to challenge. Accordingly, the results of those subjects were declared between 01.09.2016 to 29.09.2016; the counseling for the said subjects was conducted between 17.10.2016 to 23/26.10.2016, and appointment orders were also issued on the respective dates. It was further submitted that candidates who participated under the same advertisement, were appointed as School Lecturers prior to the petitioners and their seniority has been counted/reckoned from the date of appointment, however, in respect of the remaining subjects, where the result was under challenge, the appointment orders could not be issued on time despite the fact that in certain subjects counseling process had already been completed by the respondent-Commission. 8. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the litigation, which was pending before this High Court, attained finality, thereafter, respondent-Commission declared the revised results on different [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (61 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] dates, i.e., between 29.05.2017 to 13.06.2017, as per its convenience. On the basis of the revised results, the Commission forwarded its recommendations to the respondent-State Government. Thereafter, the first counseling was conducted for certain subjects and in some cases, fresh counseling was conducted on the basis of revised results. Ultimately, appointment orders were issued for those remaining subjects during the period from 09.06.2017 to 01.07.2017. He further submitted that on account of variation in the dates of declaration of the results and issuance of recommendations and stay order as passed by the High Court in respect of certain subjects, a substantial gap occurred in the issuance of appointment orders to candidates who applied for various subjects of School Lecturer under the common advertisement issued by the Commission. It was contended that the respondent-State prepared the initial common seniority list dated 15.05.2020 on the basis of the dates of appointment, however, although the petitioners submitted their objections, the same were not considered in accordance with law and the seniority list was finalized and published without giving due consideration to their objections. 9. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Bhandari further submitted that the recruitment and selection to the post of School Lecturer, which is governed by the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 1970’ for short). It was submitted that the respondent-State Government, in the year 2021, repealed Rajasthan Educational Service rules 1970 and the Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 by way of [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (62 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] a notification dated 26.07.2021, and notified the Rajasthan Educational (State and Subordinate) Service Rules, 2021, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 2021’ for short), which came into effect from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette. Rule 46 of the Rules of 2021 is produced here as under:- “46. Repeal and Saving- The Rajasthan Educational Service Rules, 1970 and the Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 and all orders issued in relation to matters covered by these rules and in force immediately before the commencement of these rules are hereby repealed: Provided that any action taken under the rules and orders so repealed shall be deemed to have been taken under the provisions of these rules.” 10. Mr. Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel further pointed out that the services of the petitioners were initially governed by the Rules of 1970 and their appointments were also made under the said Rules. The relevant provisions of the Rules of 1970, namely Rules 26 and 28, are reproduced hereunder:- “26. Appointments to the Service – Appointments to the posts in the service by direct recruitment or by promotion, as the case may be, shall be made by the appointing authority on occurrence of substantive vacancies by selection of persons in the manner indicated in rule 22 or in rules 24 and 25: Provided that if the appointing authority is satisfied in consultation with the commission that no suitable officer is available in the service for promotion to any post or posts, it may fill that post by appointing an officer on contract, or on deputation form the Government of India or any other State Government or by direct recruitment: Provided further that in making such appointment the provisions of the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (limitations of functions) Regulation, 1951, shall be adhered to. Provided further that the appointments to the posts in Group ‘F’ by promotion shall be made from the [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (63 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] lists prepared under rule 24 and 25 in the ratio prescribed under sub-rule (2) of rule 23. 28. Seniority- Seniority of persons appointed to the lowest post of the Service of lowest categories of post in each of the Group/ Section of the Service as the case may be, shall be determined form the date of confirmation of such persons to the said post but in respect of persons appointed by promotion to other higher posts in the Service or other higher categories of posts in each of the Group/ Section in the Service, as the case may be shall be determined for the date of their regular selection to such posts. Provided – (1) that the seniority interse of the persons appointed to the service before the commencement of these rules and/ or in the process of integration of the service of the pre-reorganised State of Rajasthan or the service of the new State of Rajasthan established by the State Re-organisation Act 1956 shall be determined, modified or altered by the appointing authority on an adhoc basis; (2) that if two or more persons are appointed to posts in the same category in the same year, a person appointed by promotion shall be senior to a person appointed by direct recruitment; (3) that the seniority interse of persons appointed to posts in a particular category by direct recruitment on the basis of one and the same selection, except those who do not join service when a post is offered to them, shall follow the order in which they have been place in the list prepared by the Commission under rule 20; (4) that the seniority inter se of persons appointed to posts in a particular category by promotion shall follow the order in which they have been placed in the lists prepared under rules 24 and 25; (5) that the seniority inser se of the teacher in grade II and teachers in grade I on promotions to the post in Group „F‟ of Schedules I, II and III shall be determined in the ratio of 4:1, respectively and that these posts will be filled in the following cyclic order, that is :- A. First four : teachers in grade II. B. Fifth : teachers in grade I on promotions as mentioned above. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (64 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] C. Next four: teachers in grade II D. Next : teachers in grade I on promotion as in B E. Cycle to be repeated. (6) that the seniority of persons appointed to posts in group ‘F’ and the post of Lecturer of Government Teachers Training Collage (sic College), Deputy Inspector of Physical Education after selection by the Committee under proviso 4 to rule 6, shall reckon from the date of their selection by the Screening Committee in the relevant Groups, Interse seniority of these persons shall be as fixed by the committee. (7) that the common seniority of persons appointed to posts mentioned in Group ‘E’ and ‘F’ for promotion to the posts in the Group ‘D’ shall be determined with reference to the date of their substantive appointments. The interse seniority of persons selected by the Commission of Committee shall be as indicated by the Commission or Committee. Inter se seniority of persons selected against departmental promotion quota shall be determined under rules 24 and 25. (8) that the seniority inter se of officer in each group of the service specified in Schedule I and II for promotion to the posts included in Schedule III shall be determined with reference to the date of their substantive appointment on a post in such group. The inter se seniority of officers selected by the Departmental Promotion Committee unless determined earlier will be determined on the basis of length of continuous officiation on the post from which promotion is made, except adhoc and fortuitous provided further that the seniority of members of the service for general institutions included in schedule III irrespective of their earlier promotion to the posts included in Schedule I or Schedule II. (9) that the persons selected and appointed as a result of a selection, which is not subject to review and revision, shall rank senior to the persons who are selected and appointed as a result of subsequent selection. Seniority inter se of persons selected on the basis of seniority-cum-merit and on the basis of merit in the same selection shall be same as in the next below grade. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (65 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] (10) Deleted. (11) that the seniority of the persons absorbed as a result of taking over of private institutions shall be determined with reference to the year of absorption of such persons and they shall rank junior to the persons appointed by direct recruitment or by promotion in the post is to be filled in by promotion only in the relevant category during the year of their appointment. The inter-se seniority of such persons will, however, be fixed according to date of continuous appointment in the same grade under such management/ agency; provided that any predetermined seniority shall not be disturbed. The service rendered by the employees of private institutions on an equated posts shall be counted as experience or service required for promotion or direct recruitment under these rules as the case may be. (12) that the Seniority of Head Masters, Secondary/ Higher Secondary Schools taken over by the Government form Municipal Board/ Councils/ Corporation, shall be determined from the date of their continuous appointment in the same grade in Municipal Board/ Council/ Corporation, if they are qualified to hold the posts, otherwise seniority shall be fixed in the lower grade, for which they were qualified. @(9) that the persons selected and appointed as a result of a selection which is not subject to review and revision, shall rank senior to the persons who are selected and appointed as result to subsequent selection; „Seniority inter se of persons selected on the basis of seniority-cum-merit shall be the same as in the next below grade except in case of continued officiation on higher posts when it shall be accordance with the length of continued officiation, provided that such officiation was not adhoc or fortuitous.” @ Substituted vide Notification No F 7 (6) Karmik (Ka-II)/75/-II dated 13.10.1975 (effective form the date of publication in the Raj parta i.e. 31.10.1975) for- £ (9) that the seniority inter se of persons appointed by promotion to a particular class of posts on the same date shall be the same as in the next below grade, except in case of continued officiation on [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (66 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] higher posts when it shall be in accordance with the length of such continued officiation if such officiation was not adhoc or fortuitous.” £ Added vide Notification No F 1 (26) Apptts (A-II)/61 pt-II dated 25.9.75. (13) That if a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Casts/ Scheduled Tribe is promoted to an immediate higher post/ grade against a reserved vacancy earlier that his senior general / O.B.C. candidate who is promoted later to the said immediate higher post/ grade, the general/O.B.C. candidate will regain his seniority over such earlier promoted candidate will regain his seniority over such earlier promoted candidate of the Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe in the immediate higher post/ grade.” 11. Learned Senior Counsel further argued that upon repeal of the Rules of 1970 and after notification of Rules of 2021, the services of the petitioners are now governed by the Rules of 2021 which came into effect from 26.07.2021. The relevant rules of the Rules of 2021, i.e., Rules 4, 15, 28, 30, 32, 34 and including impugned Rule 36 are reproduced hereunder:- “4. Composition and strength of the Service.- (1) The nature of posts included in the service shall be as specified in column number 2 of Schedule-I or Schedule II, as the case may be. (2) The strength of the posts in the service shall be such as may be determined by the Government, from time to time. (3) There shall be separate cadres in the service as specified in the Groups of Schedule-I and Schedule II - Provided that the Government may,- (a) create any post(s) permanent or temporary, from time to time, as may be found necessary and may abolish any such post(s) in the like manner without thereby entitling any person to any compensation; and (b) leave unfilled or hold in abeyance or abolish or allow to lapse any post, permanent or temporary, from time to time, without thereby entitling any person to any compensation. 15. Determination of vacancies.- (1) Subject to the provisions of these rules, the Appointing Authority shall [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (67 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] determine on 1st April every year the actual number of vacancies occurring during the financial year. (2) Where a post is to be filled in by a single method as prescribed in the Schedules, the vacancies so determined shall be filled in by that method. (3) Where a post is to be filled in by more than one method as prescribed in the Schedules, the apportionment of vacancies determined under sub-rule (1) above to each such method shall be done maintaining the prescribed proportion for the overall number of posts already filled in. If any fraction of vacancies is left over after apportionment of the vacancies in the manner prescribed above, the same shall be apportioned to the quota of various methods prescribed in a continuous cyclic order giving precedence to the promotion quota. (4) The Appointing Authority shall also determine the vacancies of earlier years, year-wise, which were required to be filled in by promotion, if such vacancies were not determined and filled earlier in the year in which they were required to be filled in. 28. Recommendations of the Commission/Board/Committee/Appointing Authority.- The Commission/ Board or the Committee or the Appointing Authority, as the case may be, shall prepare a list of the candidates, whom they consider suitable for appointment to the post concerned, arranged in the order of merit on the basis of marks obtained in the written examination/interview and forward the same to the Appointing Authority. The Commission/Board or the Committee or the Appointing Authority, as the case may be, shall not recommend any candidate who has failed to obtain a minimum of 40%marks in each of the papers of the competitive examination: Provided that,- (i) the percentage fixed as above shall be relaxed by 5% for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. (ii) the Commission/Board/Committee may also, to the extent of 50% of the advertised vacancies, keep names of suitable candidates on the reserve list category wise. The Commission/ Board may on requisition, recommend names of such candidates, in order of merit to the Appointing Authority, within six months from the date on which the original list is forwarded by them/it to the Appointing Authority. 30. Selection by the Appointing Authority.- Subject to the provisions of rule 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, the Appointing Authority shall select candidates in the order of merit in the list prepared under rule 28: [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (68 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Provided that inclusion of a candidate's name in the list confers no right to appointment unless the Appointing Authority is satisfied after such inquiry as may be considered necessary that such candidate is suitable in all other respects for appointment to the post concerned. 32. 32. Criteria, Eligibility and Procedure for Promotion.- (1) As soon as the Appointing Authority determines the number of vacancies under rule 15 of these rules and decides that a certain number of posts are required to be filled in by promotion, it shall subject to the provisions of sub-rule (6), prepare a correct and complete list of the senior most persons who are eligible and qualified under these rules for promotion on the basis of seniority cum merit or merit. The persons enumerated in column 6 of Schedule-1 or Schedule-II, as the case may be, shall be eligible for promotion to the post specified against them in column 2 thereof to the extent indicated in column 4 subject to their possessing qualification and experience, on the first day of the month of April of the year of selection, as specified in column 7"" Deleted Proviso" (3) No person shall be considered for first promotion in the service unless he/she is regularly selected on the post from which promotion is to be made in accordance with one of the methods of recruitment prescribed under the provisions of these rules. Explanation: In case direct recruitment to a post has been made earlier than regular selection by promotion in a particular year, such of the persons who are or were eligible for appointment to that post by both the methods of recruitment and have been appointed by direct recruitment first, shall also be considered for promotion. "(4) The person who had not been considered for promotion up to the year 2019-2020 because he/she had more than two children on or after 1 June 2002 shall be considered for promotion from the date on which his/her promotion was due and on such promotion his/her pay shall be re-fixed at the pay which he/she would have drawn but no arrear shall be paid and if any person who has more than two children on or after 1st June, 2002 and his promotion becomes due in the year 2020-2021 or thereafter shall be considered for promotion from the date on which his/her promotion becomes due and his/her pay shall be fixed for the promotional post, but he/she shall be entitled for annual increment notionally for three subsequent years and after such three years he/she shall be allowed actual benefits of such increments, however no arrears shall be paid for such notional increments. There shall be no consequential effect on subsequent promotions of the person promoted as per provisions of this sub-rule. The person already [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (69 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] promoted shall not be reverted due to implementation of this sub-rule:" Provided that,- (i) the person having more than two children shall not be deemed to be disqualified for promotion so long as the number of children he/she has on 1st June, 2002, does not increase. (ii) where a person has only one child from the earlier delivery but more than one child are born out of a single subsequent delivery, the children so born shall be deemed to be one entity while counting the total number of children. (iii) while counting the total number of children of a candidate, the child born from earlier delivery and having disability shall not be counted. (iv) any candidates who performed remarriage which is not against any law and before such remarriage he is not disqualified for promotion under this sub. rule, he shall not be deemed to be disqualified with effect from 01.06.2002, if any child is born out of single delivery from such remarriage." (5) Selection for promotion on the post included in the service shall be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit: Provided that,- (i) promotion on the highest post in the State service, if it is at least third promotion, shall be made on the basis of merit alone. (ii) if the Committee is satisfied that suitable persons are not available for selection by promotion to the post strictly on the basis of merit in a particular year, selection by promotion to the post on the basis of seniority- cum-merit may be made in the same manner as specified in these rules. (6)(1) The zone of consideration of persons eligible for promotion shall be as under:- Number of vacancies Number of eligible persons to be considered (a) for one vacancy five eligible persons (b) for two vacancies eight eligible persons (c) for three vacancies ten eligible persons (d) for four or more vacancies three times the number of vacancies. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (70 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] (ii) Where the number of eligible persons for promotion to higher post is less than the number specified above all the persons so eligible shall be considered. (iii) Where adequate number of the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, as the case may be, are not available within the zone of consideration specified above, the zone of consideration may be extended upto seven times the number of vacancies and the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, as the case may be, (and not any other) coming within the extended zone of consideration shall also be considered against the vacancies reserved for them. (iv) for any post in the service, except otherwise provided in the schedules appended to these rules,- (a) if promotion is from more than one category of posts in the same Level in Pay Matrix, eligible persons upto two in number from each category of posts in the same Level in Pay Matrix, shall be considered for promotion. (b) if promotion is from more than one category of posts carrying different Level in Pay Matrix, eligible persons in the higher Level of Pay Matrix, shall be considered for promotion first and if no suitable person is available for promotion on the basis of merit or seniority cum merit, as the case may be, in the higher Level in Pay Matrix, than only the eligible persons of other categories of posts in lower Level in Pay Matrix, shall be considered for promotion and so on and so forth. The zone of consideration for eligibility in this case shall be limited to five senior most eligible persons in all. (7) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this rule, the conditions of eligibility for promotion, constitution of the Committee and procedure for selection shall be the same as prescribed elsewhere in these rules. (8) The Committee shall consider the cases of all the senior most persons who are eligible and qualified for promotion to the class of post(s) concerned under these rules and shall prepare a list containing names of the persons found suitable on the basis of seniority-cum-merit or on the basis of merit, as the case may be, as per the criteria for promotion laid down in these rules, equal to the number of vacancies determined under these rules. The list so prepared on the basis of seniority-cum-merit and/or on the basis of merit, as the case may be, shall be arranged in the order of seniority of the category of post(s) from which selection is made. (9) The Committee may also prepare a list on the basis of seniority-cum-merit as the criteria foof seniority can dorit in these rules containing names of persons not exceeding the number of persons selected in the list prepared under sub-rule (8) above to fill temporary or permanent [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (71 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] vacancies which may occur subsequently. The list so prepared on the basis of seniority-cum-merit or on the basis of merit, as the case may be, shall be arranged in of seniority in the shall be reviewed and revised by the Committee that meets in the subsequent year and that such list shall remain in force till the end of the last day of the year for which the meeting of the Committee is held. (10) Lists prepared under sub-rule (8) and (9) shall be sent to the Appointing Authority together with Annual Performance Appraisal Reports/Annual Confidential Reports and other service records of all the candidates included in the lists as also of those not selected, if any. Explanation: For the purpose of selection for promotion on the basis of merit, no person shall be selected if he/she does not have "Outstanding" or "Very Good" record of at least four out of seven years proceeding the year for which the meeting of the Committee is held. (11) If in any subsequent year, after promulgation of these rules, vacancies relating to any earlier year are determined under these rules which were required to be filled in by promotion, the Committee shall consider the cases of all such persons who would have been eligible in the year to which the vacancies relate irrespective of the year in which the meeting of the Committee is held and such promotion shall be governed by the criteria and procedure for promotion as was applicable in the particular year to which the vacancies relate and the service/experience of an incumbent who has been so promoted, for promotion to higher post for any period during which he/she has not actually performed the duties of the post to which he/she would have been promoted, shall be counted. The pay of a person who has been so promoted shall be re-fixed at the pay which he would have derived at the time of his/her promotion but no arrears of pay shall be allowed to him/her. (12) The Government or the Appointing Authority may order for the review of the proceedings of the Committee held earlier on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of record, or on account of a factual error substantially affecting the decision of the Committee or for any other sufficient reasons e.g. change in seniority, wrong determination of vacancies, judgment/direction of any Court or Tribunal, or where adverse entries in the Confidential Reports of an individual are expunged or toned down or a punishment inflicted on him/her is set aside or reduced. The concurrence of the Department of Personnel and the commission (where Commission is associated) shall always be obtained before holding the meeting of the review Committee. (13) Where consultation with the Commission is necessary, the lists prepared by the Committee shall be forwarded to the Commission by the Appointing Authority along with the Annual Confidential Rolls/Annual [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (72 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Performance Appraisal Reports of all the persons whose names have been considered by the Committee. (14) The Commission shall consider the lists prepared by the committee along with other relevant documents received from the Appointing Authority and unless any (14) The Commission shall consider the lists prepared by the committee along change is considered necessary shall approve the lists. In case the Commission considers it necessary to make any change in the lists received from the Appointing Authority, it shall inform the Appointing Authority of the changes proposed by it. After taking into account the comments of the Commission, if any, the Appointing Authority may approve the lists finally with such modification as may, in its opinion, be just and proper and when the Appointing Authority is an authority subordinate to the Government, the lists approved by the Commission shall be disturbed only with the approval of the Government. (15) Appointments shall be made by the Appointing Authority taking persons out of the lists finally approved under sub-rule (14) in the order in which they have been placed in the lists, till such lists are exhausted or reviewed and revised or remain in force, as the case may be. (16) The Government may issue instructions for provisionally dealing with promotions, appointments or other ancillary matters in an equitable and fair manner of persons who may be under suspension or against whom departmental proceedings is under progress at the time promotions are considered to a post to which they are eligible or would have been eligible but for such suspension or pendency of such enquiry or proceedings. (17) The provisions of this rule shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained else wherein any provision of these rules. 34. Appointment to the service.- Appointment to the post in the service by direct recruitment or by promotion, as the case may be, shall be made by the Appointing Authority on occurrence of substantive vacancies from the candidates selected under rule 28 in order of merit and by promotion from the persons selected under rule 32 of these rules. 36. Seniority.- Seniority of persons appointed to the post encadred in the service shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection in accordance with the provisions of these rules. Appointment on ad hoc or urgent temporary basis shall not be deemed to be appointment after regular selection: Provided that, (1) the inter-se seniority of persons appointed to a post in a particular category by direct recruitment [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (73 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] on the basis of one and the same selection, except those who do not join Service when a post is offered to them within a period of six weeks from the date of issue of order or longer, if extended by the Appointing Authority, shall follow the order in which their names have been placed in the list prepared under rule 28. (2) if two or more persons are appointed to the service during the same year, a person appointed by promotion shall rank senior to a person appointed by direct recruitment. (3) the persons selected and appointed as a result of a selection, which is not subject to review and revision, shall rank senior to the persons who are selected and appointed as a result of subsequent selection. (4) the seniority inter-se of persons selected on the basis of seniority cum merit and on the basis of merit in the same selection shall be the same as in the next lower grade. (5) the seniority inter-se of the persons adjudged suitable under sub-rule (3) of rule 6 shall be determined according to their length of continuous service and they shall en-bloc rank junior to all the persons appointed regularly by direct recruitment or by promotion upto the date of the commencement of these rules. (6) interlacing of seniorities maintained by different ranges/divisions/appointing authorities on a post, for the purpose of promotion to the next higher post in the regular line of promotion, shall be made on the basis of dates of joining by the candidates to the post irrespective of placement in the seniority list maintained by the range/ division/ appointing authority concerned.” 12. Learned Senior Counsel further contended that after the appointment of petitioners on the respective dates, they were duly confirmed on their respective posts and subject wise seniority list came to be prepared. The grievance as raised by the petitioners is that under the Rules of 2021, they are eligible for promotion to the next higher post, i.e. Vice Principal, for which the respondents were required to prepare a combined seniority list. 13. It was also contended that Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 deals with seniority and provides that the seniority of persons appointed to the post under the Rules shall be determined from the date of [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (74 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] appointment after regular selection in accordance with law. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the complete controversy involved in the present batch of petitions is that the Rules of 2021, more specifically Rule 36, do not address the issue of determination of inter-se seniority of School Lecturers appointed for various subjects for which the selection process was initiated under the same advertisement. According to him, the Rules are silent on this aspect and there is no clarity in this regard, therefore, the petitioners have been left with no option but to challenge the validity of Rule 36 of Rules of 2021. 14. He further submitted that first and second proviso to Rule 36 of Rules of 2021 provide that the inter se seniority of persons appointed to a post in a particular category by direct recruitment, on the basis of one and the same selection, shall be determined in the order in which their names have been placed in the list prepared under Rule 28 of Rules of 2021. He further submitted that Rule 28 deals with recommendations made by the Commission. By referring to Rule 28 of Rules of 2021, it was contended that the Commission, in terms of Rule 28 is required to prepare a list of candidates found suitable for appointment to the posts and to arrange their names in order of merit on the basis of marks obtained in the written examination and/or interview and to forward the same to the Appointing Authority. He further argued that on receiving the recommendation from the Commission, the Appointing Authority, i.e. State, under Rule 30 of Rules of 2021, shall select the candidates, subject to the provisions of Rules 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, strictly in accordance with the order of merit as [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (75 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] prepared under Rule 28 of Rules of 2021. Thereafter, under Rule 34 of Rules of 2021, appointments of the candidates as finally selected are to be made strictly in the order of their merit. 15. He further submitted that the Rules of 2021 do not provide any provision as to how the inter-se seniority of School Lecturers appointed for different subjects shall be prepared. The word used therein is ‘inter-se seniority’ for persons appointed to a post under the same selection process shall be maintained in accordance with the merit list prepared under Rule 28 of the Rules of 2021 by the Commission. In the present case, under the impugned advertisement, various posts of School Lecturer, in as many as 27 subjects, were advertised vide advertisement dated 16.10.2015, wherein the last date of submission of applications, eligibility conditions and other formalities were common, the petitioners were eligible for appointment for the posts of respective subjects. 16. Accordingly, the candidates belonging to different subjects participated in one and the same selection process, wherein the first paper, i.e. General Knowledge, was common to all while the second paper was of their respective subjects and conducted on different dates as they could not be conducted on the same day due to some practical difficulty and administrative convenience. After conducting the second paper for each subject, the Commission declared the subject-wise result on different dates as per its convenience because as per the advertisement, wherein large number of posts were advertised, it appears that it was not feasible or practically possible to declare the result of all the [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (76 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] subjects on the same date . It was pointed out that as for the subject Hindi more than 3,000, for subject Geography more than 1100, for subject English more than 800, for subject History approximately 2000, for subject Political Science more than 2200 vacancies were advertised and for which substantial number of candidates appeared in the examination as conducted wherein they appeared and, thereafter got selected by the respondents . 17. The Commission declared results for almost all the subjects, however, results of some of the subjects was put to challenge by certain candidates before the Hon’ble High Court, due to which selection process was stayed by the High Court including further proceedings pursuant to the advertisement. Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Bhandari, submitted that prior to such challenges being made to the result in respect of certain subjects, the commission had already declared the results for other subjects for which fewer posts were advertised and the process was going on smoothly without any legal or other hurdle. In those subjects, the selection process was completed, recommendations were forwarded by the Commission and the Appointing Authority immediately issued appointment orders. This happened because the number of posts as advertised for certain subjects were very few in number. 18. He specifically submitted that, since the selection process for certain subjects was put to challenge, therefore, the remaining candidates of the other subjects were appointed as School Lecturers without any delay and this happened due to [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (77 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] administrative and situational convenience of Respondent- Commission and State Government. 19. It was submitted that in respect of the remaining subjects, where selection process had been stayed by the Hon’ble High Court, the entire process came to be stalled, however, thereafter, as per the orders of the Hon’ble High Court, the Commission declared the revised results on different dates and thereafter, made recommendations to the Appointing Authority. After conducting the counseling in remaining subjects, the appointing authority issued appointment orders again on different dates without any legal basis but for their convenience. He specifically pointed out that the candidates belonging to the subjects whose results were not put to challenge were appointed earlier, despite having participated in the same advertisement and the same selection process. Consequently, due to the earlier issuance of appointment orders, such candidates were assigned higher seniority, whereas Rules of 2021 do not provide for the determination of seniority in such manner. He further submitted that the entire exercise as undertaken by the Commission and the Appointing Authority, i.e., respondents herein, appears to have been carried out on the basis of their convenience and suitability. In order to show the illegal disparity created between the petitioners and the other similarly situated candidate though applied for different subjects but under the same selection process, the petitioners prepared comparative details in the form [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (78 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] of Schedule A and B, which are reproduced as under (part of the pleadings of the Writ Petition):- Schedule -A S No Subjects Subject wise Post Result Date Recommen dation Forwarding Date by RPSC Counseling Date Appointm ent order Date Revised Result Date (As per Order of Hon’ble High Court) Recomm endation Forwardi ng Date by RPSC Counseling Date Appointm ent Order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11 13 14 15 1 Political Science 2256 22.09.16 Recommen dation not sent - - 31.05.17 05.06.17 09.06.17 09.06.17 2 English 860 04.10.16 Recommen dation not sent - - 29.05.17 06.06.17 10.06.17 10.06.17 3 Hindi 3237 29.09.16 Recommen dation not sent - - 02.06.17 13.06.17 16.06.17 16.06.17 4 History 1968 23.09.16 Recommen dation not sent - - 05.06.17 16.06.17 22.06.17 22.06.17 5 Commerce 247 26.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointm ent order not issued 13.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17 6 Physics 822 18.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointm ent order not issued 12.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17 7 Biology 599 1.10.16 26.10.16 03.11.16 Appointm ent order not issued 13.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17 8 Home Science 107 19.09.16 07.11.16 - - 08.06.17 23.06.17 24.06.17 24.06.17 9 Geography 1210 28.09.16 7.11.16 Counseling not conducted - 12.06.17 27.06.17 28.06.17 28.06.17 10 Sanskrit 364 24.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling not conducted - 07.06.17 27.06.17 28.06.17 28.06.17 11 Economics 180 30.09.16 07.10.16 Counseling not conducted - 08.06.17 29.07.17 01.07.17 01.07.17 12 Rajasthani 8 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 - - - - 13 Philosophy 1 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 - - - - 14 Music 2 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 - - - - 15 Sindhi 6 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 - - - - 16 Sociology 11 20.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 - - - - 17 Maths 276 05.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 - - - - 18 Drawing 145 20.09.16 16.10.16 23.10.16 23.10.16 - - - - 19 Chemistry 799 17.09.16 17.10.16 23.10.16 23.10.16 - - - - Schedule- B S No. Subjects Subject Wise Post Result Date Recommendation Forwarding Date b RPSC Counseling Appointment order date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Rajasthani 8 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 2 Philosophy 1 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 3 Music 2 01.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 4 Sindhi 6 21.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 5 Sociology 11 20.09.16 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 6 Maths 276 05.09.01 07.10.16 17.10.16 17.10.16 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (79 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 7 Drawing 145 20.09.16 16.10.16 23.10.16 23.10.16 8 Chemistry 799 17.09.16 17.10.16 26.10.16 26.10.16 9 Commerce 247 26.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointment order not issued 10 Physics 822 18.09.16 25.10.16 03.11.16 Appointment order not issued 11 Biology 599 01.10.16 26.10.16 03.11.16 Appointment order not issued 12 Geography 1210 28.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling not conducted - 13 Sanskrit 364 29.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling not conducted - 14 Economics 180 30.09.16 07.11.16 Counseling not conducted - 15 Political Science 2256 22.09.16 Recommendation not sent - - 16 English 860 04.10.16 Recommendation not sent - - 17 Hindi 3237 29.09.16 Recommendation not sent - - 18 History 1968 23.09.16 Recommendation not sent - - 19 Home Science 107 19.09.16 Recommendation not sent - - 20. Mr. Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that on the basis of the dates of appointment, as mentioned in the aforesaid tables, the respondent-State prepared the seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure-9). The petitioners, being aggrieved, submitted their representations and objections against the said seniority list vide letter dated 26.11.2022 (Annexure-11). In the said representation, it was specifically pointed out that a serious anomaly has occurred in the preparation of the functional eligibility list, as prepared for conducting the D.P.C., for the post of Vice-Principal only on account of the delay of seven months in issuance of revised result, recommendation, counseling and then issuance of appointment orders to the petitioners herein. It was further contended that such delay occurred due to the selection process being stalled on account of the stay order of the Hon’ble High Court in respect of certain subjects as various acts of Commission were put to challenge, in which [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (80 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] the candidate like the petitioners were not at fault. It was further contended that, only on account of the stay, candidates of such subjects suffered and their appointment orders were issued with a delay of about 7-8 months, which resulted in their placement, lower in the seniority list, below other earlier appointed candidates under the same selection process. It was also pointed out that less meritorious candidates of various subjects were assigned seniority over the top ranker and high merit holders of different subjects and by this the Commission allowed the less meritorious candidates to march over the meritorious candidates. By allowing such a serious illegality in the merit list of selected candidates under the same selection process, the merit was seriously sacrificed. 21. He further submitted that the Rules of 2021 do not provide for preparation of the seniority list in the manner as adopted by the respondents and therefore, the entire action is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. He further pointed out that there is no provision under the Rules of 2021 which prescribes the manner or method for preparation of seniority in such circumstances, particularly with regard to inter-se seniority of the Lecturers appointed through the same selection process for different subjects. He further submitted that after the advertisement of the year 2015, the respondent issued another advertisement dated 13.04.2018, bearing advertisement No. 10/2018-19 whereby posts of School Lecturer in as many as 20 subjects were again [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (81 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] advertised, which included a majority of the subjects covered under the earlier advertisement of 2015. 22. In the advertisement of the year 2018, it was specifically pointed out by learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Bhandari, that the results were declared on the same date and thereafter, counseling was conducted as scheduled by the Commission through its Press Note dated 24.08.2020. Although counseling and document verification were held on various dates but the appointment orders for all subjects were issued on a single date i.e., 18.03.2021. He further submitted that in respect of the advertisement of 2018, no such anomaly occurred and the inter se seniority of candidates across all subjects was determined on the basis of the merit secured by them in their respective subjects. 23. He further contended that (under the advertisement of 2018), the candidates securing first position in merit in each subject were placed in the highest rank, followed by candidates securing second, third and fourth positions in their respective subjects. This ensured proper weightage, consideration and value to meritorious candidates of each subject by placing them at an appropriate position strictly in accordance with their respective merit, while issuing appointment orders on the same date and accordingly, assigned them proper place in the seniority list. 24. In view of the above, Mr. Bhandari submitted that by following the process as was followed in Advertisement of 2018, also under the scheme of the Rules of 2021, a combined inter se [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (82 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] merit list ought to have been prepared for all subjects, including all the candidates selected during the selection process under the advertisement of 2015, as impugned in the present batch of writ petitions. 25. However, in the case of the present petitioners, a different yardstick was adopted, resulting in unwarranted complications. Consequently, top rank holders and meritorious candidates across various subjects have been placed much lower in the seniority list, which has seriously affected their right to be considered for promotion to the post of Vice-Principal and thereafter, to the post of Principal. Such action on the part of respondent Commission and the State Appointing Authority herein, is seriously illegal, arbitrary and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the present case and prayed for quashing of the same. 26. Mr. Bhandari, relied upon various judgments to support his arguments which are as under: (1) Ajay Kumar Shukla v. Arvind Rai and Ors.; (2022) 12 SCC 579. (2) Rajeev Narain Upadhyay v. State of U.P.; WP No. 53123/2012 (3) Ajeet Singh v. State of Punjab; (1999) 7 SCC 209 (4) H.M. Singh v. Union of India; (2014) 3 SCC 670 (5) Sudhir Kumar Atrey v. Union of India & Ors.; (2022) 1 SCC 352 [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (83 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] (6) C. Jayachandran and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors.; 2020 SCC Online SC 281(Supreme Court) (7) Sudharshan Mundra v. Goverdhan Kumar & State of Rajasthan; D.B. SAW 516/2025 (RHC) (8) Ravi Juneja and Ors. v. HPGCL; LPA No. 1208 of 2012 (O&M) (P&H HC) 27. Per Contra, learned AAG, vehemently opposed the writ petitions and submitted that the challenge to the proviso to Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 is misconceived and thereby deserves to be dismissed. 28. Learned AAG further submitted that law in relation to promotion is well settled as it is not a vested right and consideration has to be given as per the rules applicable at the time of such consideration. In case of petitioners herein, earlier Rules of 1970, Rules of 1971 and thereafter, Rules of 2021 have already made the provisions of promotion, explicitly clear and unambiguous. 29. Learned AAG contended that the Rules of 2021 came into force upon publication in the Official Gazette and thus, govern all the matters relating to seniority and promotion thereafter. Promotion is not a vested right and the settled position of law is that consideration for promotion must be made in accordance with the rules prevailing on the date of consideration. He further contended that the principle governing determination of seniority [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (84 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] under the Rules of 2021 is substantially same as was provided under the Rules of 1970. 30. It was also argued that merely because the advertisement for School Lecturer posts for all the subjects was advertised together, the same does not itself make the post/cadre common. The eligibility criteria, number of posts, selection process, etc. for all the posts of School Lecturer for various subjects was separate and distinct and thus, no common seniority list, as desired by petitioners, could have been prepared by the respondents by applying inter se seniority of persons appointed due to common advertisement issued for selection on concerned post for various subjects. 31. It was further contended that law regarding the presumption of constitutionality of the Rules of 2021 is well settled and thus, it was upon the petitioners to demonstrate that the impugned Rule is invalid or irrational, which they have failed to demostrate by pleadings and arguments before this Court. In the case at hand, the proviso (1) to Rule 36 of Rules of 2021 carves out an exception to the rule pertaining to consideration of date of appointment as the basis for determination of seniority for incumbents selected in the same selection process. 32. Learned counsel also raised an objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition. It was submitted that the writ petitions suffer from the vice of non-joinder of a necessary party, as the Department of Personnel, which notified that the Rules of 2021 has not been impleaded despite the challenge being made against the validity of the Rules. It was further argued that the [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (85 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] petitions raise undisputed questions of fact, therefore, he seriously questioned the entertainability of the present petitions. 33. He further pointed out that although recruitment to various posts of Lecturer was initiated through a common advertisement, yet each subject constituted a separate and independent recruitment process. While the General Knowledge paper was common for each subject, however, each subject had a separate subject paper, eligibility criteria, vacancies, merit lists, separate declarations of results, recommendations by the Commission and appointment orders. Consequently, appointments to different subjects Lecturer cannot be regarded as appointments arising out of the "same selection" only on the ground that they originated from a common advertisement. 34. Learned AAG also submitted that the petitioners have adopted mutually inconsistent stands. On one hand they challenged the constitutional validity of the Rules of 2021, while on the other, they contended that the seniority list has been prepared contrary to the very Rules that are under challenge. If the grievance is only against the preparation of the seniority list, then the appropriate remedy lies in challenging the seniority list and not the validity of the Rules. 35. Learned AAG further referred to Rule 28 of the Rules of 1970 and Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021, and argued that seniority is always determined on the basis of the date of appointment after regular selection in service. He relied upon the notification dated 10.10.2002 issued by the Department of Personnel, whereby several service rules, including the Rules of 1970, were amended [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (86 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] to expressly provide that seniority shall be determined from the date of appointment after regular selection in service. 36. Learned AAG further contended that the recruitment agency, i.e. the Commission, merely conducts examinations, prepares subject-wise merit lists and forwards recommendations, whereas the Appointing Authority completes the statutory formalities before issuing appointment orders. Since the Rules prescribe the date of appointment as the governing factor for determining seniority, therefore, they were justified in assigning seniority on the basis of appointment date and in the present case, there is neither any illegality in the entire exercise nor any violation of the Rules of 1970 then now Rules of 2021. 37. Learned AAG further explained to this Court that the respondents have followed a consistent method in preparing the combined seniority list. The seniority year for each subject has been determined with reference to the date on which the first appointment order for that subject was issued. Accordingly, where the first appointment in a subject was made between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017, the seniority year was assigned as 2016-17; whereas in the case, where the first appointment was made between 1 April 2017 and 31 March 2018, the seniority year was assigned as 2017-18. It was pointed out that the first appointment order for School Lecturer (Physics) was issued on 24.06.2017 and, therefore, all candidates appointed against that post of school Lecturer (Physics) were correctly assigned seniority from the year 2017-18. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (87 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 38. It was further argued that the merit assigned by the Commission has not been disturbed in any manner. Within each subject, seniority strictly follows the merit list as prepared by the Commission. Where the first appointment orders for two or more subjects are issued on the same date, the inter se seniority of candidates holding the same merit position in their respective subject-wise merit lists is determined on the basis of age/date of birth, which is a well-recognised principle. 39. Learned AAG laid emphasis to the relevant rules and stated that the proviso 1 to Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 applies only to appointments arising out of the same selection for the same post. Since School Lecturer posts in different subjects are distinct, having separate examinations, separate merit lists and separate recommendations, appointments to different subjects cannot be treated as emanating from the same selection. Consequently, the petitioners' interpretation of the proviso is contrary to the scheme of the Rules. 40. It was also submitted that the petitioners, having participated in the recruitment process with full knowledge of the applicable Rules and having accepted appointments thereunder, are now estopped from challenging the statutory mechanism governing seniority merely because a combined seniority list as prepared for promotion to the post of Vice Principal is adversely affecting their promotional rights. 41. Lastly, it was contended by learned AAG that Rule 36 of the Rules of 2021 itself has not been challenged by the petitioners. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (88 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] The challenge is confined only to Proviso (1) thereof, whereas the substantive rule itself mandates determination of seniority on the basis of the date of appointment. The proviso merely supplements the main provision and cannot be read in isolation. Since the principal provision remains unchallenged, the challenge to the proviso alone is misconceived. 42. Learned AAG relied upon the following judgments to support his arguments, which are as follows: 1. PU Joshi and Ors. v. Accountant General, Ahemdabad and Ors; (2003) 2 SCC 632 2. K Meghachandra Singh and Ors v. Ningam Siro and Ors; (2020) 5 SCC 689 3. State of Uttaranchal & Ors. v. Dinesh Kumar Sharma; (2007) 1 SCC 683 4. Allahabad University & Ors. v. Geetanjali Tiwari (Pandey) & Ors.; (2024) 20 SCC 23 5. Direct Recruitment Class II Engineering Officers’ Association v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.; (1990) 2 SCC 715 6. Pawan Pratap Singh & Ors. v. Reevan Singh & Ors.; (2011) 3 SCC 267 7. Ganga Vishan Gujrati & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; (2019) 16 SCC 28 43. Mr. R.N. Mathur, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the private respondents strongly opposed the submissions as made by counsel for the petitioners, justified the impugned seniority list and action of the respondent of treating the assignment of [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (89 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] assigning the seniority on the basis of date-wise declaration and consequent issuance of appointment orders on the post of respective subject-wise School Lecturers. According to learned Senior Counsel, School Lecturer of different subject forms a separate cadre and, therefore, subject-wise results as declared earlier shall make the candidates stand higher in merit and consequent seniority and, accordingly, it was rightly followed by the respondent-State while issuing the combined seniority list. He further referred to various provisions of the Rules of 2021 and submitted that the Rules were rightly followed in the entire exercise and now, after so many years, the persons who were assigned respective seniority, higher in order, cannot be disturbed. In the concluding submissions, all the respondents counsel, prayed that the writ petitions being devoid of merits deserve to be dismissed. 44. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 45. In this batch of writ petitions and also connected special appeals, the grievances of the petitioners are that despite participating in the same selection process initiated under the same advertisement dated 16.10.2015 issued by the Commission, by which various subject-wise posts of School Lecturer were advertised, they were not assigned correct year of selection and correct inter se seniority. School Lecturers are appointed for teaching to the students of class 11th and 12th. The services of lectures were earlier governed by Rules of 1970, when the advertisement was issued in the year 2015. The petitioners [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (90 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] herein participated in the selection process and appeared in the common General Knowledge and General Studies paper which was conducted on a common day and on different dates for the said respective subject paper. With the conduct of subject-wise examination by the Commission, one part of the process was completed by commission. Thereafter, the Commission declared the subject-wise result on different dates. Though there was no specific condition in advertisement to declare the result of any subject in any sequence by giving preference to one over to other, however, it appears to this Court and also argued by counsel for petitioners that the commission declared the result as per its convenience and without any valid justification and any legal foundation. 46. This Court, after considering the relevant provision, which provides for preparation of seniority list, of the Rules of 1970-71 and subsequent to their repeal, Rules of 2021, noted that in the present case, the seniority list was prepared, considering different dates of declaration of result, consequent recommendations as made by the Commission, pursuant to which the appointment orders were issued by Appointing Authority in the order as it was received. However, a perusal of the Rules of 2021 reveals that they maintain a complete silence in regard to the preparation of a common inter se seniority list for the entire cadre of School Lecturers across all the subjects which, according to the petitioners’ is to be considered as one cadre in respect of determining inter se seniority among School Lecturers [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (91 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] appointed for different subjects, under the same advertisement which is a same selection process as per the Rules. 47. 47. However, it has been noted that the Commission as per its convenience, declared the subject wise results on different dates and after preparing the merit lists, made recommendations to the Appointing Authority for the same. The Appointing Authority thereafter issued subject-wise appointment orders on different dates accordingly. This sequence was then taken as the basis to determine the inter se seniority among School Lecturers of different subjects under the impugned Rule 36. As pointed out and also noted by this Court, results for certain subjects was declared on the dates as mentioned in schedule A and B, and accordingly, the recommendations were made, appointment orders were issued and candidates joined their service. For certain subjects, the selection process was put to challenge by certain candidates for various reasons and, therefore, in case of those subjects, some candidates were appointed while others were made to wait due to the stay on the selection process. Even in some subjects, no person could be appointed after the stay, as the complete process was put on hold for those subjects. Later on, after decision of those writ petitions, the selection process for the remaining subjects was re-started, recommendations issued, counseling conducted and lastly, the appointment orders were issued again in a sequence as per administrative convenience of State. 48. Admittedly, it is not in dispute, that all the candidates participated under the same advertisement dated 16.10.2015, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (92 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] however, the results were declared on different dates for reasons which not attributed to the petitioners. It is in sequence of date of declaration of results candidates were issued the appointment orders. The petitioners herein faced the difficulty when the respondents issued seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure 9), by which they were assigned different selection years and erroneously very low seniority, despite participating in the same selection process initiated under the same advertisement. It was informed to this Court and also noted despite the fact that advertisement was one and the same, however candidates of around 7 subjects were assigned seniority of 2016-17 and for 17 subjects, seniority of 2017-18 was assigned. The Rules of 2021 nowhere provides for assignment of year of selection in such manner. If such kind of practice is allowed to be continued, then in cases where the selection process remains stalled for years due to judicial scrutiny and candidates are appointed in parts then permitting assignment of seniority in same sequence would lead to assignment of different selection year and would result in grave and serious anomalies. It is for this reason, when faced with serious difficulties, petitioners submitted their objections, but same were not considered and decided objectively by the concerned authorities. Therefore, they filed the instant petitions by which challenge has been made to the proviso 1 to impugned Rule 36 of Rules of 2021, as seniority has been prepared in terms of said impugned Rules. As the grievance of the petitioners is in regard to the impugned inter-se seniority, and on that basis consequential [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (93 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] denial of promotion for the post of Vice Principal and therefore, the provisions of the governing rules needs to be examined 49. A perusal of the Rules of 1970 and Rules of 1971 and after their repeal, Rules of 2021, shows that the merit list is prepared by Commission for each subject strictly on the basis of merit. There is nothing in the rules, nor there are any notifications, circulars, instructions, etc. issued by the Department of Personnel or by the Commission, which permit them to prepare the merit list in such sequence by giving priority to any specific subject and thereafter, making recommendation in that sequence. The selection process in question before this Court pertains to the year 2015-16. It is a settled law that in any selection process, merit cannot be sacrificed at any cost, therefore, all selections must be made strictly in accordance with merit. 50. The impugned rules as challenged, at the cost of repetition, is reproduced as under:- 36. Seniority.- Seniority of persons appointed to the post encadred in the service shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection in accordance with the provisions of these rules. Appointment on ad hoc or urgent temporary basis shall not be deemed to be appointment after regular selection: Provided that, (1) the inter-se seniority of persons appointed to a post in a particular category by direct recruitment on the basis of one and the same selection, except those who do not join Service when a post is offered to them within a period of six weeks from the date of issue of order or longer, if extended by the Appointing Authority, shall follow the order in which their names have been placed in the list prepared under rule 28. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (94 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] (2) if two or more persons are appointed to the service during the same year, a person appointed by promotion shall rank senior to a person appointed by direct recruitment. (3) the persons selected and appointed as a result of a selection, which is not subject to review and revision, shall rank senior to the persons who are selected and appointed as a result of subsequent selection. (4) the seniority inter-se of persons selected on the basis of seniority cum merit and on the basis of merit in the same selection shall be the same as in the next lower grade. (5) the seniority inter-se of the persons adjudged suitable under sub-rule (3) of rule 6 shall be determined according to their length of continuous service and they shall en-bloc rank junior to all the persons appointed regularly by direct recruitment or by promotion upto the date of the commencement of these rules. (6) interlacing of seniorities maintained by different ranges/divisions/appointing authorities on a post, for the purpose of promotion to the next higher post in the regular line of promotion, shall be made on the basis of dates of joining by the candidates to the post irrespective of placement in the seniority list maintained by the range/ division/ appointing authority concerned. 51. The impugned Rule 36 provides that the seniority of persons appointed shall be determined on the basis of date of appointment under the Rules. Proviso (1) to 36 provides for preparation and assignment of inter-se seniority to the candidates, who participated in selection process which is one and common for all, by placing their names in terms of the merit list prepared under Rule 28. Rule 28 provides for recommendation of the Commission/ Board/Committee/Appointing Authority. As the Commission is the recruiting authority, therefore, the Commission has to prepare list [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (95 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] of eligible and suitable candidates and to arrange them in the order of marks as secured by them. On preparation of this list, the Commission recommends names to the Appointing Authority, which under Rule 30, following Rules 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, appoint the candidates strictly as per merit. The grievance here is in respect of inter-se seniority as prepared by the respondents, as it is adversely affecting the promotional rights of the petitioners. Rule 36 is the only relevant for determination of inter-se seniority. On perusal of Rule 36, this Court noted that there shall be one inter-se seniority of all selected candidates appointed under the one and same selection process. The term one and the same selection process came to be examined in catena of cited judgments where it was held that the selection process initiated under a common advertisement shall be treated as one selection process. In terms of the settled law, as cited, it is not in dispute that all petitioners participated in common and same selection process and therefore cannot given differential treatment. 52. This Court, as referred and placed on record by petitioners, considered the stand of State Government from the reply as filed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12746/2025 titled as ‘Nitesh Kumar & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan’, and noted that similar issues cropped up in the past also, therefore, the Department of Personnel issued directions to the Commission to declare the complete results of all subjects in one go, so that it may undertake document verification in accordance with the directions of the DoP, ensuring that appointment/ posting [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (96 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] orders are issued on the same day and all anomalies are removed. The relevant para of the reply as filed in the case of Nitesh Kumar (supra) reads as under:- “20. That the averments made in para no.20 of the writ petition are not disputed insofar as they are in conformity with the orders passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench vide Annex.P/8 attached to the writ petition. Remaining assertions made by the petitioners in this para are emphatically denied the made by the petitioners in this para are emphatically denied the manner in which they have been asserted. In this regard, answering respondents respectfully refer to Para-6 and 7 of the order dated 10.2.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench, which are usefully extracted as follows: "6. Learned AAG is directed to take final instructions regarding the inter se seniority of the Lecturers and address this Court on the next date. 7. Thus, while keeping the issue open to be addressed on the next date i.e. 15.04.2025, it is directed that the State shall complete the exercise of conducting the review DPC/ DPC for the posts of Vice Principals and Principals and also complete the task of posting after proper counseling. This exercise shall be completed for all the posts that are vacant on this date, for which the review DPC/DPC is due. It is made clear that such promotion/posting shall remain subject to the final outcome of these petitions. This order shall supersede all orders previously passed in this matter by this Court as well as Hon'ble Single Bench in the ongoing litigation before this Court today." In pursuance of the order dated 10.2.2025, State Government provided guidelines dated 24.2.2025 to proceed with seniority list and DPC of the Vice Principal cadre as per Hon'ble Court's direction. For the future, RPSC has been Hon'ble Court's direction. For the future, RPSC has been one go, given the fact that document verification is to be carried out by the department now as per DOP's direction. Similarly, it has been directed to issue posting orders on the same day after DV and counseling. In pursuance of the orders referred above, Department conducted counseling of candidates selected for promotion to the post of Vice Principal against the [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (97 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] vacancies of the year 2022-23 and provided them posting, as also, initiated process for conducting DPC for the vacancy years 2023-24 and 2024-25. Also, vide order dated 9.7.2025, RPSC has been requested to provide its recommendation for appointment of candidates on the post of School Lecturer (various subjects) for ongoing orders on the same day after DV and counseling. In this regard, recruitment agency will send credential of the meritorious candidates to the Department; department will conduct documents verification and will forward its report to the recruitment agency and then only, final merit list will be issued by the recruitment agency. In this way, posting orders will-also be issued in future in one go.” 53. The above quoted stand of the State Government is based on the reason that merit should not be sacrificed. Considering the above admitted stand of the State, circumstances, in the present case, act of the Commission of declaring results, making recommendations in such a sequential manner and the further act of the appointing authority of issuing the appointment order in such sequence is neither fair, legal nor justified and contrary to their stand. Therefore, as noted, the State Government through the Department of Personnel, has itself issued instructions to the Commission to declare the results in one go, so that appointments may also be made by the State Government on the same date ensuring that the inter-se seniority list is strictly determined on the basis of merit alone. 54 This Court noted that in the advertisement of the year 2018 also results were declared on different dates between June 2020 to August 2020 and thereafter, recommendation were sent on different dates. However, the appointing authority issued the appointment order on common date, following the Rules of 2021, as all candidates participated for School Lecturer in [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (98 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] one and same advertisement which is nothing but the same selection process. The common inter-se seniority was prepared strictly as per merit by placing the top rank holders of each subject on the top and thereafter 2 nd , 3 rd , 4 th and respective rank holders of different subjects were placed in that sequence while preparing the inter-se seniority strictly as per merit. 55. The complete challenge as made before this Court by the petitioners herein could have been avoided by the State by following the same process as they followed in advertisement of 2018. Admittedly, in both the cases, common advertisement for the same post having different subject wise vacancies advertised and having all other commonalities, but just because results in some subjects under the advertisement of the year 2015 could not be declared due to stay by Hon’ble High Court, the procedure foreign to the rules and also to their own stand was adopted. During the course of argument, counsel for the state failed to justify as to why the different different method/process/scheme were adopted by them when both the selection process were governed by the Rules of 2021. Once the respondents themselves, by following the mandate of Rule 36, prepared the inter-se-seniority in 2018 advertisement, as per merit of all the candidates, who participated under the same advertisement, then there action, is perverse, illegal and arbitrary, of assigning different selection years and consequential erroneous seniority is in disregard of the fact that the petitioners [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (99 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] herein, though belong to different subject but participated under the same advertisement of the year 2015, similar to the advertisement of the year 2018. 56. Further, the action of respondent-State of assigning different selection year to the candidate of same advertisement due to judicial scrutiny of the selection process, most specifically 2017-18 (instead of 2016-17) is highly, unjustified, arbitrary, and illegal on the face of record. It is on the basis of above, a huge disparity and serious complications have been created for the candidates who had participated in the same selection process. 57. After perusal of the impugned proviso 1 to Rule 36 and other relevant Rules, as referred vis-a-vis exercise undertaken by respondents under the advertisement of 2018, this Court is of the view that the impugned rule is constitutionally valid and this Court find no reason to declare them unconstitutional. The complete impugned exercise as done by the respondent-State is without any basis, justification and without any support of the then Rules of 1970 or the new rules, i.e., of 2021. Therefore the complete act of assigning different years of selection for all the candidates who participated under the same advertisement, is also erroneous and per se illegal. Mr. Bhandari, learned Senior Counsel, also pointed out that even while preparing the seniority for year 2017-18 to the candidates of the selection process of the year 2015, grave illegalities were committed in again in assigning the inter se seniority as again respondents acted as per their administrative convenience without any legal basis. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (100 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] On perusal of the scheme of Rules this Court is of the opinion that administrative convenience of the Commission and respondent-State cannot be permitted to frustrate the principle of merit and inter se seniority in the complete selection process. The impugned exercise undertaken by the respondent-State in preparation of the merit list has resulted in a situation where less meritorious candidates of one subject have been placed above candidates of other subjects who are demonstrably more meritorious, including those securing top and higher ranks in the overall merit. 58. This Court noted that under the Rules of 2021, there is no priority accorded to any specific subject for the purpose of making promotion to the post of Vice Principal. However, the manner in which the seniority list was prepared, resulted in School Lecturers of certain subjects being treated as senior and are being declared as more meritorious which is in disregard of their actual merit performance in the recruitment process. The law relating to equal and fair opportunity for promotion is well settled. 59. This settled principle of equal and fair opportunity has been dealt by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Shukla (supra) where the Hon'ble Supreme Court by relying upon earlier precedents, on which the counsel for petitioners have also relied in the present petition, held that right to promotion is not a fundamental right but fair consideration of promotion has evolved as a fundamental right. The Court observed that Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution, as they are closely connected to each other, establish that while there is no absolute right to be [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (101 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] promoted, every eligible employee possesses a fundamental right to be considered for promotion following the principle of equality and fair opportunity. Article 16(1) ensures that if an individual meets the eligibility criteria, denying him a fair spot in the selection process constitutes a constitutional infraction. Thus, equal opportunity and the resulting inter-se seniority are protected facets of a citizen's personal employment rights under the law. 60. It is also a settled law that candidates higher in merit cannot be denied seniority or penalized because of litigation delays that had no relation to their eligibility for consideration of the said post. If the principle of equal and fair opportunity is not applied in determination of inter-se seniority and promotions, then it would negate the mandate of both Rules of 1971 as well as 2021. 61. In the present case, once the respondents by following the Rules of 2021, have prepared the inter se seniority correctly for the selection under the advertisement of the year 2018 then they are legally duty bound to apply the same principle to the selections in the year 2015 as well. Thus, the act of the respondent-Commission and the respondent Appointing Authority as noted in the above para of the detailed discussion, is found to be unjustified and arbitrary per se. After considering the judgments as cited, the stand of the State Government from the reply as filed in the case of Nitesh Kumar (supra) and the practice as adopted by them for the selection process of the year 2018 and also the instructions, guidelines, etc. as issued by Department of Personnel, [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (102 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] Government of Rajasthan from time to time, whereby the Public Service Commission and the respective Department have been directed to issue the select list in one go so as to avoid any kind of unnecessary complexities in any selection process when the advertisement and the conditions of participation are one and same, the impugned seniority list dated 21.11.2022 (Annexure-9) is declared illegal and therefore, same is quashed and set aside. The promotion as made to the post of Vice-Principal during the pendency of these writ petitions, on quashing of the above impugned seniority list are also declared illegal and are hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent- Appointing Authority is directed to assign same selection year to all the candidates who participated, selected and appointed under the advertisement of the year 2015, while following the same exercise as they followed for the advertisement of 2018 in assigning the same year of selection. Thereafter, prepare the inter-se seniority list of the candidates who were appointed under the advertisement of 2015, strictly as per the procedure as followed in 2018, and thereafter, make the promotion to the post of Vice principal and other higher post strictly following the Rules of 2021. It is expected that the respondent Appointing Authority shall issue necessary notification, circular, order etc., if required, to remove any anomaly, if remains, in respect of the controversy as raised before this Court, after the order of this Court, so as to avoid further litigation and complexity. 62. The above exercise regarding preparation of the correct inter-se seniority shall be carried out within a period of four [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (103 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] months from the date of passing of this order without any further delay. 63. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed. 64. There shall be no order as to cost(s). 65. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.119/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19366/2024:- Madan Mohan Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 66. The instant special appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the final order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19366/2024 titled as Madan Mohan Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & others. 67. By the order impugned the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition in view of the additional affidavit as filed and the statement made by State Counsel regarding pendency of D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1408/2023. As this Court has decided the D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1408/2023 and other connected petitions, in view of the same, the present special appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.12.2024 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Single Judge to decide afresh in terms of the order as passed in this bunch of writ petitions. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.461/2023 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7643/2022:- State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Ajay Kumar Rohila & Ors. [2026:RJ-JD:14608-DB] (104 of 104) [CW-1408/2023] 68. The instant special appeal is directed against the order dated 05.05.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7643/2022 titled as Ajay Kumar Rohila & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and others. In the said writ petition, by the order impugned dated 05.05.2023 the learned Single Judge noticing the order passed by the Division Bench in connected D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.895/2023 titled as Pradeep Kumar Khangwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, restrained the respondents from granting posting on the post of Vice Principal in terms of the promotional exercise as carried out. 69. As the controversy involved in the D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.895/2023 and connected writ petitions have been decided by the order as passed in the batch of writ petitions, in view of the same, this special appeal as directed against the order dated 05.05.2023 is disposed of. The appellant State/respondent- petitioners may file appropriate application in the pending writ petition before learned Single Judge to decide the same in terms of order of this Court. 70. Copy of the present order be separately placed in each connected file. 71. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J RAHUL KUMAR