CW 10078/06 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10078/06 Sanjay Mathur Versus State & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 09/02/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. G.K. Garg, for petitioner Mr. Pradeep Kalwania, Addl. Govt. Counsel, for State Mr. P.N. Paliwal for Mr. B.K. Sharma, for respondent *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner with the grievance that despite the fact that he was eligible to be screened in terms of circular issued by the respondents Ann.3 dt.22nd January, 1998 without assigning reason, his candidature was rejected by the screening committee and general order as alleged was communicated to those who participated in the screening committee vide order dtd.26th October, 2002. Petitioner joined service as Junior Engineer as evident from document Ann.2 dt.1st November, 1995 and since then he is continuously working on daily wages basis. Respondents issued circular Ann.3 dt.22nd January, 1998 to regularize such Junior Engineers who have completed two years of service as on 30th November, 1997 and are in service from the date of issuance of circular. However, petitioner being covered in terms of circular was adjudged by the screening committee CW 10078/06 [2] but without assigning any reason his candidature was rejected. So far as general communication in regard to applicants who appeared before the screening committee as communicated vide order Ann.6 dt.25th October, 2002 and impugned decision of the respondents came for consideration before this court and after adjudication in the case of Dara Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan [2004 (4) WLC- 117], finally observed as under: “12. As a result of the foregoing discussions, I allow to instant writ petitions and direct as under: (i)the impugned order dated October 25, 2002 so far it relates to the petitioners stands set aside. (ii)The respondents shall give similar treatment to the petitioners as has been given to Rameshwar Lal Sharma, Ramesh Chand Sharma and Babulal Kandola and regularise the services of petitioners on the post of junior Engineer in accordance with law. (iii)The respondents shall ensure compliance of this order within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (iv)There shall be no order as to costs.” CW 10078/06 [3] Counsel for petitioner submits that after decision of this court in the case referred to supra, all identical petitions were decided in the light thereof and he too is entitled for same relief as granted to other similarly situated persons by this court. Counsel for respondents submits that once the screening committee found the petitioner unsuitable and decision was communicated way back in October, 2002, filing of writ petition after inordinate delay which is four years certainly dis-entitles him for claiming relief. While raising preliminary objection, it has not been disclosed by the respondents that when their decision Ann.6 dt.25th October, 2002 was communicated to the petitioner and once decision of the screening committee has been examined by this court in the judgment [supra] holding it to be arbitrary and has been set aside. It was expected from the respondents to consider such persons including the petitioner who were otherwise covered in terms of circular Ann.3 dt.22nd January, 1998 for regularization of service through screening committee constituted therein. CW 10078/06 [4] Consequently, writ petition is allowed. Petitioner is entitled for similar treatment as extended to Rameshwarlal Sharma, Ramesh Chand Sharma & Babulal Kanodla and the respondents are directed to regularise services of petitioner on the post of Junior Engineer as observed by this Court in Dara Singh Vs. State (supra). Compliance be made within three months. No costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA10078CW06 9-2.doc