Rajasthan High Court
CW/16727/2018 of DEEPENDRA SINGH MOGA S/O SHRI BODU RAM MOGA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY on 24 August 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16727/2018 CNR: RJHC020676812018 | URN: CW / 27926U / 2018 1. Deependra Singh Moga S/o Shri Bodu Ram Moga, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Dhani Moga Wali, Ward No.- 2, Vill-Reengus, Teh. Shri Madhopur, Distt. Sikar (Raj.) 2.
[2026:RJ-JP:34186]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16727/2018
CNR: RJHC020676812018 | URN: CW / 27926U / 2018
1.
Deependra Singh Moga S/o Shri Bodu Ram Moga, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Dhani Moga Wali, Ward No.- 2, Vill-Reengus, Teh. Shri Madhopur, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
2.
Harphool Bunkar S/o Shri Rampal Bunkar, Aged About 38
Years, Resident Of Vill. Sahibrampura, Post, Anoppura, Via Kaladera, Teh. Amer, Distt. Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan Through The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.
Director Secondary Education, Education Directorate, Bikaner (Raj.)
3.
District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Jaipur (Raj.)
4.
District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Sikar (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Tanveer Ahamad
For Respondent(s)
:
None
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Judgment
24/08/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners could not refute that the petitioners would be covered under the definition of ‘government servant’, as prescribed under Section 2(c) of Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act 1976 (for short, ‘Act of 1976’), nor could the learned counsel for the petitioners
[2026:RJ-JP:34186] (2 of 2) [CW-16727/2018] refute that the lis in question also falls under the ‘service matters’, as defined under Section 2(f) of the Act of 1976.
2. In view thereof, since the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy available in law, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for withdrawal of the present petition with liberty to approach the learned Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for short, ‘RCSAT’) for redressal of grievances of the petitioners.
3. Considering the oral prayer advanced, the present petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the learned RCSAT for redressal of their grievances.
4. It is directed that if the petitioners file appropriate appeal(s) before the learned RCSAT within a period of 30 working days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, the learned RCSAT shall adjudicate the same on merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months.
5. In the meantime, in order to protect the interests of the petitioners while they avail the alternative remedy, it is directed that the status quo as on date be maintained by the parties for a period of 45 days from the date of passing of this order.
6. Needless to say, no prejudice to be caused to the petitioners based on any observations made hereinabove.
7. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/9