State Of Rajasthan vs Kiran Bala Sharma (2025:Rj-Jd:44280)
2025 Latest Caselaw 14070 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

State Of Rajasthan vs Kiran Bala Sharma (2025:Rj-Jd:44280) on 9 October, 2025

Author: Rekha Borana

Bench: Rekha Borana

[2025:RJ-JD:44280]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 71/2024

1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural
         Development      And     Panchayati Raj Department,
         Secretariat, Govt. Of Raj. Jaipur.
2.       Zila Parishad, Chittorgarh, Through Its Examination
         Controller And The Chief Executive Officer, Chittorgarh.
3.       District  Establishment             Committee,           Zila    Parishad,
         Chittorgarh.
                                                                     ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
Kiran Bala Sharma D/o Kailash Chandra Sharma Wd/o. Sushil
Kumar Sharma, R/o Ganesh Tala, Chittorgarh.
                                                                    ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr. K.S. Solanki for
                                 Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr. Bhawesh Kumar Kumawat


               HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

09/10/2025

1. The present review petition has been filed for review of order

dated 27.01.2022 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3145/2017.

2. Evidently, the present review petition had been filed in the

year 2024 and interestingly, the office had not even pointed out

the defect of limitation.

3. Be that as it may.

4. Order dated 27.01.2022 was passed on a submission made

by counsel for the petitioner therein, Kiran Bala Sharma

(respondent herein) to the effect that the issue rests covered by

the Division Bench judgment of this Court in D.B. Special Appeal

Writ No.1122/2017; Bharti Upadhayay vs. The State of Rajasthan

& Ors. (decided on 10.08.2018).

(Uploaded on 09/10/2025 at 09:47:06 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:44280] (2 of 2) [WRW-71/2024]

5. The said submission made by the counsel was not refuted by

counsel for the respondents therein (the present review

petitioners).

6. In that view, the petition was allowed in terms of Bharti

Upadhayay (supra).

7. Counsel for the review petitioners submits that as of date, no

vacancy exists qua the recruitment in question and hence, the

respondent could not have been directed to be afforded

appointment.

8. In the specific opinion of this Court, the ground as raised by

counsel for the review petitioners cannot be held to be tenable so

as to review order dated 27.01.2022. It is not the case of the

review petitioners that the issue was wrongly covered by Bharti

Upadhayay (supra).

9. Evidently, order dated 27.01.2022 was passed after counsel

for the review petitioners not refuting the issue to be covered by

Bharti Upadhayay (supra). Further, no averment regarding the

vacancies not available at that point of time, was made.

10. In that view of the matter, the said ground cannot be a

ground to entertain a review petition.

11. This Court does not find any infirmity in order dated

27.01.2022 which deserves review of the same.

12. Further, the review petition being highly delayed, does not

deserve consideration on that count too. Review petition is hence

dismissed.

(REKHA BORANA),J 1-KashishS/-

(Uploaded on 09/10/2025 at 09:47:06 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)