Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Ratan Lal vs The State Of Rajasthan … on 22 July, 2025
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2025:RJ-JD:32130]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12975/2025
Ten Singh S/o Shri Diwan Singh, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Village Bheru Chhani, 4 Jsl, Po Channibari, District Hanumangarh
(Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The District Collector Cum
District Election Officer Hanumangarh, District
Hanumangarh.
2. The Electoral Registration Officer (Sdm), Bhadra, District
Hanumangarh.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12645/2025
Narender Kumar S/o Lt. Shri Ramlal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Ward No. 3, Johad K Pass, Kalibangan, Tehsil Pilibangan, District
Hanumangarh (Raj.). (Presently Posted As Teacher Grade-III,
Level-Ii, Subject Hindi At Govt. Upper Primary School, Paldi
Pichkiya, Mundawa, Nagaur, Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The District Election Officer,
Nagaur, Rajasthan.
2. The Electoral Registration Officer (S.d.o.), Nagaur (Raj.).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12741/2025
Harish Kumar S/o Shri Krishan Lal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Village Kikarwali, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar.
Presently Posted As Teacher Grade III Level-1 At Govt. Upper
Primary School 1 Kpd B, Block Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar
(Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Served To Be Through District
Election Officer Sri Ganganagar.
2. The Electoral Registraion Officer (Sdm), Anupgarh District
Sri Ganganagar.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12968/2025
Smt. Kirti W/o Anandi Lal Tailor D/o Balveer Singh Chuohan,
Aged About 44 Years, Gavariyo Ka Bas, College Road, Ranawas
Station, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali (Raj.)
Presently Working As Senior Teacher (Sanskrit) At Government
Senior Secondary School, Tanavda, Luni, District Jodhpur (Raj.)
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (2 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Electoral Officer,
Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Electoral Registration Officer (130), Luni Assembly
Election Area, And Sub-Divisional Officer, Luni, Jodhpur
(Raj.)
3. District Election Officer (Collector), Jodhpur
4. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12973/2025
Ratan Lal S/o Shri Ram Lal, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of
Rampura Kalan, Pali.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Jaitaran, District Beawar. (Rajasthan).
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12974/2025
Girdhari Singh Charan S/o Shri Sanwal Dan Singh, Aged About
41 Years, R/o 639, Rajendra Nagar Vistar, Pali, District Pali
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To Government
Elementary Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur
(Raj.).
2. The Director, Elementary Education Bikaner, District
Bikaner (Rajasthan).
3. The District Collector, Rajsamand, District Rajsamand
(Rajasthan).
4. The District Education Officer, Secondary Education
Rajsamand, District Rajsamand (Rajasthan).
5. The Sub Divisional Officer Cum Ex-Officio Electoral
Registration Officer, Kumbhalgarh, District Rajsamand
(Rajasthan).
6. Kailash Tailor, Vidhyalay Sahayak, Government Senior
Secondary School Charbhuja, Kumbhalgarh, District
Rajsamand (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (3 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13142/2025
Om Prakash Kalosiya S/o Shri Rambaks Kalosiya, Aged About 48
Years, R/o Outside Surajpole, Rajsamand (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Secondary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. District Education Officer, Secondary Education,
Rajsamand (Rajasthan).
3. District Election Officer Cum Collector, Rajsamand
(Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13173/2025
Aarti Sharma D/o Shyam Sunder Sharma, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Plot No. 73, Bandhu Nagar, Sikar Road, Murlipura, Jaipur,
Rajasthan. Working As Teacher Gr.ii Level 2 English At Govt. Sr.
Secondary School, Uchiyarda, Bilara, District Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, School
Education Department, Government Secretariat
Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer, Elementary (Headquarter),
Jodhpur.
4. The District Election Officer (Collector), Jodhpur.
5. The Election Registration Officer (S.d.m., Assembly Bilara,
District Jodhpur.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13346/2025
Gauri Shankar Awasthi S/o Kailash Chand Awasthi, Aged About
29 Years, R/o Village Khoh, Post Khoh, Tehsil Laxmangarh Khoh,
District Alwar (Raj.). (Presently Posted As Teacher Grade-Iii,
Level-Ii, Subject Science-Maths At Govt. Upper Primary School,
Sokiyana, Thirod, Mundava, Nagaur, Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The District Election Officer,
Nagaur, Rajasthan.
2. The Electoral Registration Officer (S.d.o.), Nagaur (Raj.).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13353/2025
Jaydev Arya S/o Mahesh Chand Arya, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (4 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Secondary
Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Collector, Bundi, District Bundi, Rajasthan.
4. The Sub-Division Magistrate Cum Ex-Officio Electoral
Registration Officer, Bundi, District Bundi.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13510/2025
Suman D/o Shri Ramawatar, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village
And Pst Dalelpura, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The District Election Officer (Collector), District Bhilwara
(Raj.).
3. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Asind, District Bhilwara (Raj.).
4. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education,
Bhilwara (Raj.).
5. The Block Elementary Education Officer, Hurda, District
Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.S. Bhaleria
Mr. Deepak Pareek
Mr. Ramesh Kumar
Mr. NR Budania
Mr. Rohitash Singh Rathore
Mr. Sushil Solanki
Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya through VC
Mr. Mahendra Singh Godara
Mr. Hans Raj Nimbar
Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma with
Mr. Naved Khan Sindhi
Mr. Vinod Jhajharia through VC
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, AAG with
Mr. Ravindra Jala
Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav, Dy.G.C. with
Mr. Deepak Vaishnav & Mr. Nilesh
Choudhary
Mr. N.K. Mehta, Dy. G.C. with
Mr. Bhupesh Charan
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (5 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
22/07/2025
1. The present writ petitions have been filed aggrieved of the
orders impugned whereby the petitioners have been appointed as
Booth Level Officers (BLO).
2. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioners that as per
instructions/guidelines dated 04.10.2022 of the Election
Commission of India (ECI), a Booth Level Officer should be an
elector of the polling station where he/she is deputed as BLO.
Instructions/guidelines dated 04.10.2022 were however modified
vide communication dated 05.06.2025 and as per the said
modification, it is only when a regular State/local Government
employee registered as an elector in the concerned electoral area
is not available, that an employee working in the area covered by
that part of electoral roll, can be appointed.
3. Counsel for the petitioners while relying upon clause 1.2 of
instructions/guidelines dated 04.10.2022 (as modified vide
communication dated 05.06.2025) submitted that in absence of
regular State/local Government employee, other Aaganwadi
Workers, Contractual Teachers or Central Government employees
could have been appointed as BLOs. It is only in extreme cases
where neither the regular State/local Government employees nor
the other employees as abovementioned are available that the
employees working in the area covered by that part of electoral
roll can be appointed and that too, only after obtaining a ‘Non-
availability Certificate’ signed by Electoral Registration Officer
(ERO) and counter-signed by District Election Officer (DEO).
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (6 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
4. The case of the petitioners is that no ‘Non-availability
Certificate’ was procured by the respondent authorities to ensure
that no regular State/local Government employees who were
enrolled as electors in the electoral roll of the concerned area, are
available. In absence of any such ‘Non-availability Certificate’, the
respondent-Department could not have adhered to Clause 1.3 of
the guidelines without first ascertaining the non-availability of
employees as prescribed in Clause 1.1 & Clause 1.2 of the
modified guidelines of ECI.
5. Counsels in S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos.12741/2025 &
13510/2025 raised two additional grounds:
i. There definitely were certain regular employees
available who were enrolled in the electoral roll of the concerned
area. Despite there being such regular employees available, the
petitioners have been appointed as BLOs which is in contravention
to the guidelines of ECI.
ii. The petitioner is a single teacher in the concerned
school and in terms of Clause 1.5(d) of instructions/guidelines
dated 04.10.2022 of ECI, no teacher of a single teacher school
could have been deployed as a BLO.
6. Per contra counsels for the respondent-Department
submitted that the necessity to obtain the ‘Non-availability
Certificate’ is only in the case where the Department was to
proceed in terms of Clause 1.2 of the guidelines. Herein, the
Department proceeded in terms of Clause 1.3 of the guidelines
and hence, no ‘Non-availability Certificate’ as prescribed in Clause
1.2 of the guidelines, was even required.
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (7 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
7. Counsels submit that Clause 1.3 of the modified guidelines
specifically prescribes that in case of non-availability of the
employees in terms of Clause 1.1 & Clause 1.2, BLOs could be
appointed amongst such employees who were working in the area
covered by that part of electoral roll. The only requisite as per
Clause 1.3 is that a prior approval of CEO ought to be taken. The
same has definitely been taken by the State Department and
hence, the orders impugned are totally in consonance with the
directions as issued by the ECI.
8. Counsels further submit that so far as non-availability of the
employees who were the electors of the concerned area is
concerned, the same was very well ensured from all the respective
schools/institutions prior to the issuance of orders of appointment
of the BLOs.
9. In support of their submissions, counsels relied upon the
Co-ordinate Bench judgments of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.17945/2021; Mahesh Swami vs. The State of
Rajasthan & Anr. (decided on 16.03.2022) and S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.4962/2024; Tulsi Ram Munsiya vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors. (decided 09.12.2024).
10. Counsels, with the above submissions, prayed for dismissal
of the present writ petitions.
11. Heard the counsels and perused the record.
12. So far as the necessity of obtaining the ‘Non-availability
Certificate’ in terms of Clause 1.2 of the modified guidelines of ECI
is concerned, this Court is of the clear opinion that the same
would apply only when the BLOs are to be appointed amongst
Anganwadi workers, Contract Teachers or Central Government
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (8 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
employees. Only if such category of employees were to be
appointed as BLO, the CEO was under a mandate to obtain a ‘Non-
availability Certificate’ as prescribed under Clause 1.2. But
admittedly, the Department has not proceeded in terms of Clause
1.2 but has appointed the present petitioners as BLOs while
adhering to Clause 1.3 of the modified guidelines of ECI.
13. For ready reference, reproduction of Clause 1 of instructions/
guidelines dated 04.10.2022 and communication dated
05.06.2025 would be apt.
14. Clause 1 of Instructions/guidelines of Election Commission of
India dated 04.10.2022 provides as under:
“1. Appointment of Booth Level Officers
1.1 Booth Level Officers are to be appointed by the
Electoral Registration Officer under Section 13B (2) of the
Representation of the People Act, 1950 after obtaining
approval of the District Election Officer. They shall deem to
be on deputation of the Election Commission of India
under section 13CC of the RP. Act, 1950.
1.2 Booth Level Officer can be appointed from the
following suggested list of categories Government/Semi
Government employees:-
(i) Teachers
(ii) Anganwadi workers,
(iii) Patwari/Amin/Lekhpal,
(iv) Panchayat Secretary,
(v) Village Level Workers,
(vi) Electricity Bill Readers,
(vii) Postman,
(viii) Auxiliary Nurses & Mid-wives,
(ix) Health workers,
(x) Mid-day Meal workers,
(xi) Contract teachers,
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (9 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
(xii) Corporation Tax Collectors, and
(xiii) Clerical Staff in Urban area (UDC/LDC etc.)
1.3 Besides the above list, the following
official/individuals can also be appointed/drafted as BLO:-
a. Central Government employees can be drafted only
when prescribed/suggested 13 prescribed options have
been exhausted.
b. Group ‘B’ officers can be drafted if prescribed/suggested
13 prescribed options have been exhausted.
c. Willing Retired government servant only where serving
government servants are not available within the polling
area. However, in rural area, the District Election Officer
shall give a non-availability certificate (Annexure-I) in
such cases.
d. Any specific category as and when required on case to
case basis by CEO of concerned State, after prior approval
of the Commission.
1.4 To the extent possible, a Booth Level Officer should
be an elector in the polling station where she he is
deputed uted-as-Booth Level Officer. However, for the
urban area ACs, if it is found more feasible by the CEO,
work area may be aligned with their work place of original
department/organization.
1.5 Following points should also be ensured before
deployment of BLOs:-
a……
b……
c……
d. Teachers shall be drafted minimally as Booth Level
Officers. However, where necessary, they should be
drafted for Booth Level Officer work during holidays and
during non-teaching hours and non-teaching days so as to
avoid any loss of academic work. It must be ensured that(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (10 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]no teacher of a single teacher school is deployed for this
purpose.”
15. The above Clause was modified vide communication dated
05.06.2025 which reads as under:
“I am directed to refer to the Commission’s Guidelines No.
23/BLO/2022-ERS dated 4th October 2022, issued with
regards to the appointment of Booth Level Officers. In
accordance with the directions given by the Hon’ble
Commission during the Chief Electoral Officer’s Conference
held on 23rd May 2025 in New Delhi, it is hereby stated
that the instructions contained in paragraph 1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
and 1.4 of the above-mentioned guidelines and in
paragraphs 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 & 5.2. of Manual on
Electoral Rolls-2023, stand modified as follows:
1.1 ERO to appoint a BLO for each part of an electoral
roll, under Section 138 (2) of the Representation of the
People Act, 1950, amongst any Group C and above
regular serving employees of state/local government
enrolled as elector in that part.
1.2 In the absence of regular state/local government
employees, ERO may appoint BLO amongst Anganwadi
warkers, Contract Teachers, or central government
employees. However, in such cases, CEO shall obtain a
non-availability certificate (Annexure-1) signed by ERO
and countersigned by DEO.
1.3 In the absence of any employee of categories
mentioned above enrolled as an elector in that part of
electoral roll, ERO, with the prior approval of CEO, may
appoint BLO amongst such categories of employee
working in the area covered by that part of electoral
roll.
1.4 In any other case, prior approval from the
Commission shall be mandatory.
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (11 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
2. All Chief Electoral Officers are requested for the strict
compliance of the above said guidelines of the Commission
and to send an ATR by 20th June, 2025 positively.”
16. What can be interpreted and concluded from the above
Clauses is that the first priority for appointment of Booth Level
Officer is to be given to those regular State/local Government
employees who are the electors of the concerned area where they
are to be deployed as BLOs.
17. If no employee falling in the above category is available, the
BLOs can be appointed amongst the Anganwadi workers, Contract
Teachers or Central Government employees. But then, they also
ought to be the elector of the concerned electoral area. However,
if such employees are to be deployed, a ‘Non-availability
Certificate’ was to be procured by the CEO.
18. In case of non-availability of the employees of both the
above categories i.e. the regular or the contractual employees who
are the electors of the concerned electoral area, adherence to
Clause 1.3 of the guidelines could be made. Clause 1.3 of the
modified guidelines of ECI specifically provides for appointment of
BLOs from all such categories of employees who are working in
the areas covered by that part of electoral roll. The only essential
requirement in terms of Clause 1.3 of the guidelines is that it
ought to have a prior approval of CEO.
19. Coming on to the present matters, as has been submitted in
the reply to the writ petitions, the non-availability of both the
categories of employees as prescribed in Clause 1.1 & 1.2 of the
guidelines was ensured by the respondents before adhering to
Clause 1.3 of the modified guideline.
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (12 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
20. So far as prior approval of CEO in terms of Clause 1.3 is
concerned, there is no dispute on the same as such approval has
been obtained and the relevant documents have even been
annexed along with the reply.
21. In view of the above, the ground as raised on behalf of the
petitioners to the effect that in no case, the employees working in
the concerned area could be deployed as BLOs without first
obtaining the ‘Non-availability Certificate’ qua regular State/local
Government employees or the other contractual and Aanganwadi
workers, is not tenable.
22. Evidently, the respondents have adhered to Clause 1.3 of the
guidelines and as observed above, the only requirement for the
said purpose is the approval of CEO, which has been taken.
23. The orders impugned on that count therefore, do not deserve
any interference.
24. Coming on to the ground that regular State/local
Government employees and Aanganwadi workers who are the
electors of the concerned electoral area are available and despite
such candidates being available, the petitioners have erroneously
been deployed without adhering to Clause 1.1 and 1.2 of the
guidelines. This Court is of the opinion that the said aspect can be
taken care of by directing the respondent authorities to consider
the representation of the petitioners on that aspect.
25. So far as the ground raised in two petitions i.e. S.B. Civil
Writ Petitions No12741/2025 & 13510/2025 to the extent that the
petitioners are single teachers in the concerned schools is
concerned, the interference in such cases also deserves to be
made.
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:32130] (13 of 13) [CW-12975/2025]
26. In view of the above facts, the present writ petitions are
disposed of with the following directions :
(i) If any representation is filed by the petitioners within a
period of twenty days from now, identifying any regular
State/local Government employee who is the elector of the
concerned area, the respondent authorities shall be under an
obligation to strictly comply with Clause 1.1 of the
instructions/guidelines dated 04.10.2022 (as modified vide
communication dated 05.06.2025) of the ECI.
(ii) If a representation is filed by any of the petitioners within a
period of twenty days to the effect that he/she is a single teacher
in the concerned school, the respondent authorities shall be under
an obligation to verify the said fact and if it is found true, such
petitioner shall be relieved from the duties of BLO with immediate
effect.
27. Stay petitions and pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
257-267/KashishS/-
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 09:43:17 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)