State Of Rajasthan vs Gunjan Rani
2022 Latest Caselaw 14124 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 636/2022

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Principal Secretary, Education Department (Elementary), Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.

----Appellants Versus Gunjan Rani D/o Antram Singhal, W/o Navneet Jindal, Aged About 37 Years, House No.33, 3Rd Block, Purani Abadi, Sriganganagar (Raj.).

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG assisted by Mr. Rishi Soni For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sushil Bishnoi

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PANKAJ MITHAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

01/12/2022

1. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the

judgment and order dated 17.11.2021 passed by learned Single

Judge in SB Civil Writ Petition No.13799/2021, whereby writ

petition filed by the respondent - candidate has been allowed and

a direction has been given to the State to consider petitioner's

marks as 65.017 and carry out documents verification and if found

suitable she be given appointment, if any post in her category

remains vacant.

2. Having heard Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate

General and Mr. Bishnoi, learned counsel for the respondent -

(2 of 2) [SAW-636/2022]

candidate, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge has

taken a correct view while observing that the respondent has

mentioned marks obtained by her (46.83%) in English (subject)

as against the row meant for language as an abundant caution,

which she was not otherwise required to fill.

3. We agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge

and feel that no interference is warranted in the present case,

particularly when the learned Single Judge has confined the relief

granted to the candidate by observing that appointment be given

only if any post in her category remains vacant.

4. The intra-court appeal, therefore, fails.

(DINESH MEHTA),J (PANKAJ MITHAL),CJ

5-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)