AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in the present group of writ petitions is squarely covered by judgment dated
8.2.2020 rendered by the Jaipur Bench of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by SBCWP No.11699/2018 : Anshul Mehra & Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.
Following the judgment aforesaid, the present writ petitions are also disposed of in the same terms. Relevant part of the judgment is reproduced
hereunder for the sake of clarity and ready reference:
“14.It is not in dispute that the petitioners have given their first preference as TRA but at the time of declaration of earlier result, their cut-off
marks were lower than the cut- off of TRA and consequently they were appointed to the post of Junior Accountant. However, when the result was
reshuffled in accordance with the judgment of the High Court, the cut-off for the post of TRA was also revised. Petitioners’ marks made them
eligible for being appointed to the post of TRA. Since the petitioners had given their first preference as TRA, in view of Rule 16 (3) of the Rules of
1963 they were rightly appointed on the post of TRA. Petitioners having given their first preference as TRA cannot as of right now claim continuance
on the post of Jr. Accountant.
15.The contention of counsels for the petitioners that persons with more and less marks are working as Junior Accountant is not sustainable as those
persons must have given their first priority of Junior Accountant and posts are allotted as per the choice given and marks obtained.
16.Further, petitioners have been relieved and fresh appointments have been made on the post of Jr. Accountant. Petitioners have not impleaded the
appointees on the post of Junior Accountant. Hence, they are not entitled to any mandamus.
17.Taking note of the fact that the State Government has agreed to count their period of service as period of service on the post of TRA and that the
petitioners would only be required to undergo the necessary training. I do not find any force in these writ petitions, the same are accordingly dismissed.
However, State is directed to count the service of the petitioners as service on the post of TRA. The stay applications also stand disposed.â€
All interlocutory applications including the application seeking vacation of the interim order(s) and the stay applications stand disposed of accordingly.