Bhupendra Kurdia vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:41396)
2024 Latest Caselaw 8881 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Bhupendra Kurdia vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:41396) on 9 October, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:41396]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11489/2018

Bhupendra Kurdia S/o Shri Roshan Lal Kurdia, Aged About 29
Years, R/o Thakkar Bapa Colony, Outside Surajpole, Girwa
District Udaipur.
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                          Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
         Medical And Health Services (Group-III),government Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.       The Director, Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan,
         Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur
3.       The Additional Director (Administration), Medical And
         Health       Services,          Rajasthan,     Tilak       Marg,     Swasthya
         Bhawan, Jaipur.
4.       The Joint Director, Medical And Health Services, Zone
         Udaipur.
5.       The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Udaipur.
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. Jayram Saran
For Respondent(s)              :    Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

09/10/2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a

judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.11427/2018 : Kusum Kant Dave vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 20.04.2022. He, therefore, prays

that the present writ petition may also be allowed in terms of the

[2024:RJ-JD:41396] (2 of 2) [CW-11489/2018]

order passed by this Court in the case of Kusum Kant Dave

(Supra).

3. Learned Additional Advocate General does not dispute the

submission made by counsel for the petitioner. However, he

submits that the benefit of this judgment can be granted to the

petitioner provided there is a vacancy available in the same

recruitment year.

4. In view of the submission made before this Court, the

present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed by

Division Bench of this court at Jaipur in the case of Kusum Kant

Dave (supra) and the benefit of the judgment may be granted to

the petitioner provided the vacancies are available with the

respondent-Department in pursuance of the selections undertaken

by the respondents in the same recruitment process. The

respondent-Department shall carry out the necessary exercise

within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified

copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 227-/Arun P/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)