Rohan Sarvata vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 10493 Raj

(1 of 2) [CW-12680/2018]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12680/2018

1. Rohan Sarvata S/o Shri Arjun Sarvata, Aged About 20 Years, Valmiki Basti, Bikaner

2. Rohit Kumar S/o Shri Ganesh Lal, Aged About 29 Years, Ward No. 26, Azad Nagar, Under Dev Dungari, Madanganj, Kishangarh

3. Pooja W/o Shri Rohit Kumar, Aged About 28 Years, Ward No. 26, Azad Nagar, Under Dev Dungari, Madanganj, Kishangarh

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Local Self Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)

2. Municipal Council Jobner, Through Executive Officer, Jobner

3. Municipal Council Parbatsar, Through Executive Officer, Parbatsar

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Dave For Respondent(s) : Mr. Utkarsh Singh for Mr. Sunil Beniwal

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

09/07/2021

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue

raised in the present writ petition stands covered by judgment in

Virendra Kumar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. : D.B. Special

Appeal Writ No.1733/2018, decided on 9.8.2019.

In the case of Virendra Kumar (supra), the Division Bench

inter alia ordered as under:-

(2 of 2) [CW-12680/2018]

"34. As a result of the above discussion, the appeals have to succeed in part; the respondent State shall draw the select list, after excluding the names of those reserved category candidates, who were granted age relaxation, and were afforded the opportunity of participation in the selection through draw of lots, for the open category. A fresh select list, based upon a new draw of lots to be conducted from amongst names of all eligible candidates, (excluding those reserved category candidates who had availed age relaxation benefits, but were allowed a second chance in the draw of lots for the general category candidates) shall be prepared, in respect of balance vacancies. The respondents shall also ensure that names of ineligible candidates, or those who made false declarations are suitably removed, in accordance with law; this is subject to the final outcome of the proceedings initiated by such candidates.

35. In the light of the foregoing discussion, the appeals are partly allowed; all applications too are therefore, disposed of."

In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by

the petitioners is disposed of in light of judgment in the case of

Virendra Kumar (supra).

(DINESH MEHTA),J 201-Rahul/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)