Rajasthan High Court
Shankar Lal Jat S/O Banwari Lal Jat vs Rajasthan Staff Selection Board ... on 28 March, 2024
Author: Ganesh Ram Meena
Bench: Ganesh Ram Meena
[2024:RJ-JP:15211]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11326/2023
1. Shankar Lal Jat S/o Banwari Lal Jat, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Dhani Bhana Wali, Ward No. 04, Reengus, Road,
Sikar, Rajasthan.
2. Vimal Kumar Suman S/o Sunder Lal, Aged About 31
Years, R/o H. No. 11, Santosh Nagar 2 Raipura, Kota,
Rajasthan.
3. Sunita Meena D/o Ram Lal Meena, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Vill- Bichoon, Tehsil- Maozamabad, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Sugeeta Pathak D/o Dhanesh Chandra Pathak, Aged
About 45 Years, R/o E- 65, Bhairu Ji Mandir Ke Paas,
Vallabh Garden, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
5. Suman D/o Ramswaroop, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vill
12 As Po Kupli, Tehsil- Srivijaynagar, Sriganganagar,
Rajasthan.
6. Shashikant Pandya S/o Devshanker Pandya, Aged About
42 Years, R/o Vpo- Asan, Tehsil- Garhi, Banswara,
Rajasthan.
7. Khemraj Yadav S/o Navlaji Yadav, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o Vpo- Kunwa, Tehsil- Chikhli, Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
8. Abhishek Kumar S/o Rajendra Kumar, Aged About 22
Years, R/o Bandha Darwaja, Deeg, Tehsil- Deeg,
Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
9. Heera Ram S/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Meeno Ka Vas, Lundara, Post- Malnu, Tehsil- Bali, Pali,
Rajasthan.
10. Shravan Ram S/o Pema Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Village- Araba Chouhan, Post- Araba, Tehsil- Kalyanpur,
Barmer, Rajasthan.
11. Nemi Chand S/o Parmeshwar Lal Meghwal, Aged About 40
Years, R/o Vpo- Ajeetsar, Churu, Rajasthan.
12. Mahesh Kumar Verma S/o Bhag Chand Verma, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Rangtalab Nai Basti, Kota, Rajasthan.
13. Prameshwar Lal Chotiya S/o Govind Prasad, Aged About
26 Years, R/o Vpo- Dheerdesar Chotiyan, Tehsil-
Sridungarhgarh, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
14. Kali Bai Meena D/o Prabhu Lal Meena, Aged About 28
(Downloaded on 12/04/2024 at 09:15:46 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:15211] (2 of 4) [CW-11326/2023]
Years, R/o Village- Bharja Nadi, Post- Gambhira, Tehsil-
Malarna Dungar, Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan.
15. Kanhaiya Lal S/o Gopal Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 3
Mtr Mithriya Bajju, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
16. Kana Ram S/o Hari Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Chhitalwana, Jalore, Rajasthan.
17. Nirmal Singh Meena S/o Durga Singh Meena, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Vpo- Vijaygarh, Tehsil- Hindauli, Bundi,
Rajasthan.
18. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Panchu Lal Meena, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Vill- Vijaygarh, Post- Vijaygarh, Teh-
Hindoli, Bundi, Rajasthan.
19. Sher Singh Bairwa S/o Babu Lal Bairwa, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Vill- Nikatpur, Post- Manpur, Teh- Sikrai,
Dausa, Rajasthan.
20. Vinod Kumar Teli S/o Mohan Lal Teli, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Vpo- Shambhugarh, Tehsil - Asind, Bhilwara,
Rajasthan.
21. Samarbeer S/o Bhagawati Prasad, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Village Piphera, Post- Piphera, Tehsil- Sepau, Dholpur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary,
Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Chairman,
Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Almas Khanam
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nalin G. Narain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Judgment / Order
28/03/2024
[2024:RJ-JP:15211] (3 of 4) [CW-11326/2023]
1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners fairly submits
that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is
squarely covered by the order passed by this Court vide order
dated 28.11.2023 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18767/2023
"Karishma & Ors. Vs. The Director of Primary Education,
Bikaner & Ors." alongwith other connected matters.
2. In case of Karishma (supra) this Court has observed as
under:-
"8. In case of Raman Choudhary (supra) the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur has
observed as under:-
"In view of the discussions made
above, the present writ petitions are
disposed of with a directions to the
respondents to refer the questions
mentioned in these writ petitions to the
experts appointed by them (other than
those who had already finalized the
objections to the preliminary answer key
dated 18.03.2023). The expert body, while
re-examining the matter, shall take into
account the submissions made in the
present writ petitions and thereafter pass
appropriate orders with respect to the
adjudication made by them on the
objectionable questions raised in these writ
petitions. The said exercise of examination
by the expert body shall be completed
within a period of four weeks from today
and if the respondents find the report of
the expert committee giving any change to
the answers adjudicated by them in the
final answer key, they will take the
appropriate measures for revising the
result.
Needless to say, if the petitioners
come in the merit after revision of the
result, appropriate action will be taken for
processing their case for appointment.
It is also made clear that question
Nos.3, 27 & 50 of the Master Question
Paper need not be sent to the expert body
for re-examination."
9. In view of the above, this Court disposes off these writ
petitions with liberty to the petitioners to submit the
representation detailing out their specific objections as has been
[2024:RJ-JP:15211] (4 of 4) [CW-11326/2023]
stated in the writ petitions, to the respondents within fifteen days
from today. The respondents on receipt of the representation,
shall refer the questions mentioned in the representation to the
experts appointed by them (other than those who had already
finalized the objections to the preliminary answer key dated
18.03.2023). The Expert Body, while re-examining the matter,
shall take into account the averments made in the representation
and thereafter, pass appropriate order in respect to the
adjudication made by them on the objectionable questions raised
in these writ petitions and submit before the respondents by filing
the representation. The said exercise of examination by the Expert
Body shall be completed within a period of six weeks from today
and if the respondents find the report of the Expert Committee
giving any change to the answers adjudicated by them in the final
answer key, they will take the appropriate measures for revising
the result.
10. Needless to say, if the petitioners come in the merit after
revision of the result, appropriate action will be taken for
processing their case for appointment.
11. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the RSSB
has already made recommendation to the State Government for
giving appointment to the selected candidates on the post of
Teacher Grade-III Level-II in various subjects. The respondent-
State shall make a mention in the appointment orders to be issued
about the order of re-examination of the answer key and in case
the result is revised and any person who has also been given
appointment prior to the revision of the result, does not find place
in the revised merit list, the appointment given to him before
revised result will not create any right in his favour to continue."
3. Considering the submissions made by counsel for the
petitioners, this writ petition is disposed off in terms & conditions
as given in case of Karishma (supra) with a modification that
the petitioners may submit her representation within ten days
from today.
4. Since the main petition has been disposed off, the stay
application and all pending application/s, if any, also stand
disposed of.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J
ARTI SHARMA /481
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
