A.K. Parihar, J. - (1.) The dispute is in regard to the selection to the post of Junior Compounder/Nurse in Ayurved Department for the year 1996 -1997. Separate advertisements were issued for the above years on 01/05/1996 as also 02/08/1997 respectively. The selections were to be made as per the Circular issued by the State Government on 16/11/1989 by which merit list was to be prepared on the batch -wise basis. The batches were identified by the year when the candidates completed their requisite training. Whenever vacancies occurred or notified, names were to be called through Employment Exchange and after preparing the merit list on batch -wise basis, the candidates of earlier years were to be given preference, as per their merit while giving the appointment. The above process of selection to the post in question continued till the year 1999 when the State Government vide order dated 19/04/1999 withdrew the earlier Circular dated 16/11/1989 and decided to hold selection to the above posts as per the provisions of the relevant rules to the extent that the merit list was to be prepared of all the candidates applying as per their marks obtained in the training irrespective of the year of completion of training prior to the selections were to be made. It may be pertinent to mention here that order dated 19/04/1999 came to be challenged by many of the candidates before this Court with the prayer that the selections should be made as per the Circular issued on 16/11/1989. This Court in the case of Mahesh Chandra Sharma and others Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, reported in, 1999 (2) RLR Rage 755, while holding the earlier Circular dated 16/11/1989 as absolutely dehorns the rules, found no illegality in the order dated 19/04/1999 thereby dismissing the writ petition. The above judgment of this Court in Mahesh Chandra Sharma (supra) further came to be affirmed upto the Supreme Court and all selections subsequent to the year 1999 were made as per the provisions of the Rules of 1966 as considered by this Court in the case of Mahesh Chandra Sharma (Supra).
(2.) Though having participated in the process of selection for the year 1996 -1997 as per the Circular dated 16/11/1989, the plaintiff -respondent filed a suit for declaration and injunction before the trial court on 10/05/1999 with the prayer for consideration of his candidature as per the order dated 19/04/1999 for the year 1996 -1997. By an interim injunction order of the trial court, the plaintiff -respondent was given appointment on the post in question. Since the controversy had already been decided by this Court in the case of Mahesh Chandra Sharma (supra), the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 23/02/2005 directed the defendants -appellants to give all benefits to the plaintiff -respondent from the date he was given appointment. The above judgment and decree passed by the trial court further came to be affirmed by the lower appellant court vide judgment and decree dated 03/06/2006. Hence the present appeal by the defendants -appellants.
(3.) After hearing counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record as also the judgment cited at the bar.;