Dausa Through Secretary v. Shiv Prasad Sharma S/o

Shiv Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Deory, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Shekhpura

2. Sitaram Meena S/o Shri Ghasiram Meena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Hingwa, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Hingwa

3. Mahesh Kumar Doi S/o Shri Brijmohan Doi, R/o Village [2025:RJ-JP:32183-DB] (3 of 7) [SAW-48/2022] Goliya, Post Brahman Berada, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Brahman Berada

4. Shyam Lal Sharma S/o Bhagwan Sahai Sharma, R/o Village And Post Gangduwadi, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Gangduwadi

5. Hazari Lal Meena S/o Gokulram Meena, R/o Village Gandrawa, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Gandrawa

6. Vishram Gurjar S/o Ramsingh Gurjar, R/o Village And Post Farrashpura, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Farrashpura

7. Rajendra Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Subddi Gurjar, R/o Village Nihalpura, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Nihalpura

8. Gulab Saini S/o Shri Laturmal Saini, R/o Village And Post Bahrawanda, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Bahrawanda

9. Harimohan Sharma S/o Shri Narayan Sharma, R/o Pipalki, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Pipalki

10. Ramjilal Sen S/o Shri Narayan Lal Sen, R/o Village Chhokarwada, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Chhokarwada

11. Papu Lal Meena, S/o Chandraram Meena, R/o Village Dolika, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Dolika

12. Harkesh Meena S/o Gamman Meena, R/o Village Nandari, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Nandari

13. Ashok Sen S/o Ramcharan Sen, R/o Village Sikandra, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Sikandra

14. Banwari Lal Saini S/o Kaurya Saini, R/o Village Achalpura, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security [2025:RJ-JP:32183-DB] (4 of 7) [SAW-48/2022] Guard In Gram Panchayat Achalpura

15. Girdhari Lal Saini S/o Ramet Saini, R/o Village Kundera, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Sikrai

16. Nathu Lal Gurjar S/o Sundar Lal Gurjar, R/o Village Bhojpura, Post Kelai, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Kalai

17. Lokesh Prajapat S/o Lalluram Prajapat, R/o Village And Post Denda, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Denda

18. Nihal Singh Meena S/o Kanji Ram Meena, R/o Village And Post Naharkhorra, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Naharkhorra

19. Muniram Meena S/o Girraj Prasad Meena, R/o Village And Post Chandera, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Chandera

20. Harkesh Saini S/o Lalluram Saini, R/o Village Garh, Post Ranoli, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Ranoli

21. Girraj Prasad Gurjar S/o Shyotan Singh Gurjar, R/o Village Dubbi, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Dubbi

22. Murari Lal Meena S/o Ratiram Meena, R/o Village Jaisinghpura, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Jaisinghpura

23. Bhagwan Sahai Meena S/o Kalyan Sahai Meena, R/o Village Meena Simila, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Meena Simila

24. Ramkhiladi Saini S/o Bhori Lal Saini, R/o Village Mochigpura, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Mohchingpura

25. Babu Lal Panchal S/o Shri Ramswaroop Panchal, R/o Village Gadhora, Kalakho, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat [2025:RJ-JP:32183-DB] (5 of 7) [SAW-48/2022] Kalakho

26. Miththan Lal Jangid S/o Shri Chhitar Mal Jangid, R/o Village And Post Bhankari, Tehsil And District Dausa, Presently Working As Security Guard In Gram Panchayat Bhankari ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms. Divya Rathore, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Poonam Chand Sharma, Advocate. Mr. Anshuman Saxena, Advocate. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL 18/08/2025 Order

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants-State against the order dated 25.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby in paragraph 5, the learned Single Judge held as under: In view of above, the present writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to continue the petitioners on the post till regularly selected candidates are made available and to allow them to receive salary directly from the authorities instead of Placement Agency. Necessary orders in this regard shall be issued by the respondents within a period of three weeks.

2. Counsel for the appellants-State submits that there is nothing material on record to establish employer-employee relationship between the appellants-State and respondents- employees. Counsel further submits that the respondents- employees were engaged through placement agency by the appellants-State. [2025:RJ-JP:32183-DB] (6 of 7) [SAW-48/2022]

3. Counsel relied upon the judgment of “K. K. Suresh versus Food Corporation of India”, 2018 AIR SCW 3905, decided on

20.08.2018 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, wherein in paragraph 10, it was held as under: “It is for the simple reasons that first, the case at hand arose out of the writ petitions whereas the case relied on arose out of industrial reference decided by the Industrial Tribunal; Second, the facts involved in the case at hand clearly prove that there did not exist any kind of employee and employer relationship between the appellants and the FCI; and lastly, there is no parity of any nature noticed on facts in the case at hand and the case relied on by the appellants.”

4. Counsel also relied upon the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in D. B. Special Appeal Writ No.320/2024 titled “Ankush Kumar versus State of Rajasthan & Ors., wherein in paragraphs 4 and 5, it was held as under: In a subsequent decision in the 4. Ganesh Digamber Jhambhrundkar and Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.: SLP No.2543/2023 decided on 12.09.2023 also, it has been held that the fact of having rendered services for a long time by contractual employees, would not create a vested right of employment in favour of the concerned employee. 5. The view taken by the learned Single Judge is based on dicta of Hon’ble Supreme Court in several judgments. In the absence of there being any material to show that there exists any master- ervant relationship between the appellants and the respondent- DA, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petitions. No case for interference is made out.

5. Counsel prayed for allowing the appeal and quashing the order dated 25.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge. [2025:RJ-JP:32183-DB] (7 of 7) [SAW-48/2022]

6. Counsel for the respondents-employees submits that the respondents-employees worked for more than ten years with the appellants-State and relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the matter of “Shripal and Another versus Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad”, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 221.

8. Heard. Perused. Admittedly, the respondents-employees were engaged by the appellants-State through placement agency and they were never engaged by the appellants-State directly. In the absence of their being any material to show that there exists employer-employee relationship between the appellants-State and the respondents- employees, the directions issued by the learned Single Judge deserves to be set aside.

9. The judgment referred by the counsel for the respondents- employees relates to UP Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and more particularly, Section 6E and 6N of the said Act. In the said matter, workmen raised an industrial dispute, led evidence before the Labour Court and proved their case by producing the evidence whereas in the present matter, no such efforts were made by the respondents-employees.

10. In that view of the matter, this appeal is allowed in view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of K. K. Suresh (supra) and the order dated 25.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Tushar/101