Rahul Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:13209)
2025 Latest Caselaw 8603 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rahul Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:13209) on 10 March, 2025

Author: Dinesh Mehta

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2025:RJ-JD:13209]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16918/2024

1. Rahul Kumar Sharma S/o Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Aged About 27 Years, 12E Laxman Nagar, Nandri (Rural), District Jodhpur (Raj.) - 342027

2. Dinesh Kumar Sharma S/o Siyaram, Aged About 26 Years, Galeshwar Mahadev Mandir Ke Paas, Maderna Colony, District Jodhpur (Raj.) -342007

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Govt.

Department Of Agriculture, Secretariat, Jaipur

2. Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Board, G.b. Pant Krishi Bhawan, Jan Path, Jaipur Through Administrator At Jaipur.

3. General Manager (Admn), Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Board, Jaipur

4. Executive Engineer, Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Board Division, Jaipur, Sub-Division-Terminal Market, Jaipur.

5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, State Agriculture Management Institution Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Secretary At Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankur Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sushil Solanki Mr. Dinesh Vishnoi

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

10/03/2025

1. Mr. Solanki and Mr. Vishnoi appearing for the respondents at

the outset submitted that the present case is squarely covered by

the judgment of this Court rendered in a bunch of writ petitions

[2025:RJ-JD:13209] (2 of 2) [CW-16918/2024]

led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14966/2024 (Ram Niwas &

Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.), decided on 05.03.2025.

2. Mr. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioners tried to point

out certain distinguishing facts qua the petitioner No.2, more

particularly, the fact that the petitioner No.2 was issued degree in

the Month of December, 2020. According to this Court, such fact is

not significant enough to take a view other than what has been

taken in the case of Ram Niwas (supra).

3. The present writ petition is therefore, dismissed following the

judgment rendered in the case of Ram Niwas (supra).

4. Stay application also stands dismissed, accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 229-raksha/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)