Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh Panwar vs State Of Rajasthan on 19 May, 2022
Bench: Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Writ Misc Application No. 131/2022
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10703/2018
1. Dinesh Panwar S/o Prahalad Bhambhi, Aged About 32
Years, Vpo Mevda Khurd, Tehsil Kekri, District Ajmer (Raj)
305404.
2. Rajaram S/o Jagdeesh Ram, Aged About 35 Years, Village
Surjansar, Post Bhopalpura, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sri
Ganganagar
3. Gangraj Sharma S/o Jagdish Mot, Aged About 35 Years,
Village Fuleji, Post Arjunsar, Tehsil Loonkaransar, District
Bikaner (Raj0 334604
4. Sandeep Singh S/o Harjindra Singh, Aged About 34
Years, Village Post Naharanwali, Tehsil Anoopgarh, District
Sriganganagar (Raj) 335703
5. Pramod Kumar Kukna S/o Krisna Chandra Kukna, Aged
About 38 Years, Village Akkasar, Tehsil- Kolayat, District
Bikaner 33400
6. Sunil Kumar Sharma S/o Poonam Chand, Aged About 34
Years, Village 7Sjm, Post Kamarania, Tehsil Anoopgarh,
District Sriganganagar 33570
7. Harish Kumar S/o Bheem Sen, Aged About 32 Years,
Ward No. 14 Rawla Mandi, Tehsil Gharsana, District
Sriganganagar 335707
8. Meena Kumari D/o Raj Kumar, Aged About 32 Years,
Saloni Hospital Ward No. 11 General Market 3Str, Gram
Post 24 Asc, Tehsil- Gharsana, District Sriganganagar
335707
9. Raju Singh S/o Gursevk Singh, Aged About 32 Years,
Ward No. 4, Post 9Kd A-10Kd, Tehsil Gharsana, District
Ganganagar, 335707
10. Ravinder Kumar S/o Inderjeet Delu, Aged About 32 Years,
Ward No. 4, Kalu Wala 1 Ml Deluo Ka Mahola, District
Sriganganagar 335001
11. Dr. Hanuman Prasad Verma S/o Prabhu Lal Verma, Aged
About 34 Years, Village Ghati, Post Doongry Kalan, Tehsil
Malpura, District Tonk 304502
12. Bhawana Saharan D/o Shishupal Singh, Aged About 32
(2 of 4) [WMAP-131/2022]
Years, 4, B-185, Sudarshana Nagar, Near Arya Hospital,
Pawanpuri, Bikaner Rajasthan, Pin 334003
13. Miss Soma Devi D/o Omprakash, Aged About 32 Years,
Opposite 2/197 Dhaniya Pashu Aahar Mukta Prasad
Colony, Bikaner 334004
14. Diksha Sharma D/o Dalip Kumar, Aged About 31 Years,
15Knda, Vpo Khanuwali, Tehsil Gharsana, District
Sriganganagar (Raj.) 335707
15. Nisha Chouhan D/o Ganesh Chouhan, Aged About 30
Years, 6/139 Mukta Prasad Nagar Bikaner, Rajasthan
16. Nagendra Kanwar Bika S/o Sawai Singh Bika, Aged About
31 Years, Jegania House, Sangalpura Road Bikaner,
Rajasthan
17. Mamta Meena D/o Ram Ratan Meena, Aged About 32
Years, Village Harwar (Opposite Jaipur Dental Collage)
Post Dhand, Tehsil Amer Jaipur (Raj) 302028
18. Manoj Kumar Chitara S/o Gordhan Lal Chitra, Aged About
31 Years, Phool Narayan Nagar Sojt City, Friends Colony,
Pali Raj 306104
19. Asharam Gahlot S/o Magharam Gahlot, Aged About 31
Years, Near Shiv Temple Kismidesar Bhinasar, Bikaner
334403
20. Sunita D/o Jhandu Ram Gurjar, Aged About 31 Years,
Village Lakhipura Post - Purohit Ka Bass Thasil Sikar
District Sikar
21. Kamlesh Kumar S/o Nihal Chand, Aged About 31 Years,
Vpo Peepliya, Tehsil Nainwan District Bundi 323803
22. Snehlata D/o Chet Ram, Aged About 31 Years, House No.
178, Sector 4E Jnv Colony, Bikaner 331001
23. Anil Kumar S/o Ranvir Singh, Aged About 31 Years, Room
No. 4, Boys Pg Hostel No. 2, College Of Agriculture,
Skrau, Bikaner (334006)
24. Arun Kumar Jain S/o Suresh Kumar Jain, Aged About 29
Years, Vpo Hindoli, Shivraj Nagar, Tehsil Hindoli, District
Bundi (Raj) 323023
25. Sarita Bagri D/o Om Prakash Bagri, Aged About 29 Years,
Vpo Bijoliya, Near Bsnl Office District Bhilwara (Raj)
311602
26. Prem Kumar Bhambhoo S/o Kumbha Ram Bhambhoo,
(3 of 4) [WMAP-131/2022]
Aged About 34 Years, Village Post Gomawali, Tehsil
Srivijaynagar, District Sriganganagar (Raj) 335703
27. Kiran Hingonia D/o Lal Raigar, Aged About 29 Years,
Village Damba Ka Bas, Post Mandha- Bhindha, Tehsil
Chomu, District Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303712
28. Sharda W/o Dinkar Kumar Jajoria, Aged About 32 Years,
Ward No. 7 Raigar Mohalla, Jobner, Tehsil Phulera, District
Jaipur (Raj) - 303328
29. Seema D/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 28 Years, 2/79
Housing Board, Jhunjhunu, Post Jhunjhunu Tehsil,
Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu (Raj) - 333001
30. Batti Lal Meena S/o Harsahai Meena, Aged About 27
Years, Village Bhaglaw, Post Shyalawas, Tehsil Nangal
Rajawatan, District Dausa (Raj) 303250
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Personal, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Secretary,
Ajmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pukhraj Sirvi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahesh Thanvi.
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
19/05/2022
In pursuance to the order dated 16.05.2022, an office report
has been filed stating therein that the record of the matter is not
traceable since last three years i.e. after 11.12.2018. In view of
the report made, the application for reconstitution of the record of
present writ petition is allowed.
(4 of 4) [WMAP-131/2022]
The photo copy of the writ petition along with the annexures
as filed along with the application is taken on record.
As per the order sheet dated 30.07.2018 placed on record by
the counsel for the respondents, it is clear that vide an interim
order, the respondents were directed to provisionally allow the
petitioners to appear in the selection process for the post of
Lecturer (School Education) in Agriculture subject in pursuance to
the judgment dated 13.04.2018.
Counsel for the respondents submits that in pursuance to the
order dated 30.07.2018, the petitioners were allowed to appear in
the selection process but after the declaration of the result it has
been found that the petitioners have not qualified. Moresoever, in
the case of Dinesh Jakhar & Ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
& Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7496/2018) decided on
24.01.2019, the relief for grant of relaxation in eligibility norms as
prescribed under N.C.T.E. Regulations notified on 16.12.2014 has
been negated.
In view of the said pronouncement in the case of Dinesh
Jakhar (supra) wherein similar nature writ petitions have already
been dismissed/vires of the relevant provision has been upheld
and in view of the fact that the petitioners have not qualified, the
present writ petition is dismissed.
(REKHA BORANA),J
102-Prashant/Sachin/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
