SUNDER LAL MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ms.Shikha Parnami counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue agitated in this petition is fully covered by this judgment of this court in the case of Rohitash Versus State of Rajasthan and Others SBCWP No.1767/2018 and other connected matters decided on 12.07.2018. She submitted that the selection process for appointment of LDCs in Zila Parishads is still underway and the petitioners are entitled to have their documents verified as has been directed in the case of Rohitash Versus State of Rajasthan (supra) and be appointed on vacant posts as per their comparative merit.

(2.) Mr.Shantanu Kumawat appearing on behalf of Dr.Ganesh Parihar, AAG counsel for the respondents submitted that indeed the case of the petitioners is covered by the judgment of this court in the case of Rohitash Versus State of Rajasthan (supra). He submitted that if the petitioners were to make representations to the respective Chief Executive Officers of the concerned Zila Parishads within 10 days from today their representations would be lawfully considered and they would be appointed if then warranted to vacancies if available in terms of their comparative merit in the respective Zila Parishads.

(3.) In view of the submissions recorded above, this petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the judgment of this court in the case of Rohitash Versus State of Rajasthan (supra). The directions/ observations of this court therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case of the petitioners to the extent applicable against vacancies, if any available in Zila Parishads where they applied.