Pratik Purohit vs Rajasthan Staff Selection Board ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 9708 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Pratik Purohit vs Rajasthan Staff Selection Board ... on 20 August, 2025

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:37292-DB]



      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1020/2025

Pratik Purohit S/o Ram Lal Purohit, Aged About 25 Years, Vpo
Kivarli, P.o. Shantivan, District Sirohi Rajasthan.
                                                                          ----Appellant
                                         Versus
1.       Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Durgapura Through Its
         Chairman. Jaipur.
2.       State      Of    Rajasthan          Through         Secretary       Education
         Department Government Of Rajasthan Jaipur, Jaipur.
3.       Director Primary Education Department Bikaner, Bikaner.
4.       District    Education        Officer      Primary           Education   District
         Sirohi, Sirohi.
                                                                       ----Respondents


 For Appellant(s)               :    Ms. Pratishtha Dave
 For Respondent(s)              :    Mr. B.L. Bhati, AAG
                                     Mr. Ayush Gehlot


        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI

Order

20/08/2025

1. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the

identical matter i.e. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.884/2025

(Divya Panwar vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on

07.07.2025, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has allowed the

appeal preferred by a similarly situated person. She, therefore,

prays that the present appeal may also be allowed in terms of the

order passed in Divya Panwar's case (supra)

2. Learned counsel for the respondent-State Mr. B.L. Bhati, AAG

very fairly submits that although the controversy involved in the

[2025:RJ-JD:37292-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-1020/2025]

present appeal is covered by the judgment rendered in Divya

Panwar (supra), however, the reason for approaching this Court by

way of filing the appeal is unpardonable. He submits that the

appellant did not file the appeal in time and waited for the other

appeals to be decided by the Division Bench and after the Division

Bench has ruled in favour of those persons, the present appeal

has been filed. He, therefore, submits that the benefit of filing of

the appeal at the belated stage should not be granted to the

appellant.

3. We have considered the submission made by learned counsel

for the respondents, however, we are unable to accept the same

as in the case of Divya Panwar (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court has allowed the appeal after condonation of delay of

497 days. In the present case also, the delay is of 527 days,

therefore, we are not inclined to take a different view from one

which has been taken in the case of Divya Panwar (supra), more

particularly when the appeal of Divya Panwar has been allowed on

its merits.

4. In view of the discussion made above, the delay of 527 days

in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is allowed in terms

of the judgment dated 07.07.2025 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench

of this Court in the case of Divya Panwar (supra).

(ANUROOP SINGHI),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 109-Taruna/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)