Mukesh Suman Son Of Shri Mohan Lal Suman vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 1412 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Mukesh Suman Son Of Shri Mohan Lal Suman vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 29 February, 2024

Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Bhuwan Goyal

[2024:RJ-JP:10442-DB]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

           D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1099/2023

                                           In

                S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7093/2019

Mukesh Suman Son of Shri Mohan Lal Suman, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Near Jaldaya Vibhag, Nareda Road, Shiwaji Nagar,
Baran (Raj.).
                                                                    ----Appellant
                                       Versus
1.       The State of Rajasthan, through District Collector, District
         Baran.
2.       Controller and Joint Administrative Secretary, Rajasthan
         State Motor Garage Department, Jaipur.
                                                                    Respondents

3. Aleem Son of Abdul Gani, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Bhanawada Road, Mali Ki Voodi Ke Piche, Akash Nagar, Chhabra, District Baran, Rajasthan.

4. Suresh Meena Son of Shri Gajanand Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Rajpura, Sundluka, District Baran (Raj.).

5. Chhitar Khan Son Of Ishak Mohammad, R/o Malkhedi, Chhaper, Ward No. 45, District Baran (Raj.).

----Performa Respondents

For Appellant : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini Advocate with Mr. Kapil Khandelwal Advocate and Mr. Giriraj Rajoriya Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

Judgment

29/02/2024

1. Though various grounds, assailing the order passed by the

learned Single Judge, have been raised in the appeal, we find that

writ petition was filed in the year 2019 ventilating the grievance

that even after the advertisement, the process of selection has not

[2024:RJ-JP:10442-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-1099/2023]

been brought to its logical conclusion. During the pendency of the

writ petition, advertisement was itself cancelled by the District

Collector, Baran on 13.07.2020. The record does not speak that

thereafter, any attempt was made to challenge the cancellation of

the advertisement.

2. Be that as it may, in the absence of challenge to the order of

cancellation of the advertisement, no relief could be granted by

the learned Single Judge. Therefore, giving liberty to the

appellant to challenge the order of cancellation of the

advertisement, appeal is dismissed.

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ

MANOJ NARWANI /9

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)