[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Anil Kumar vs The High Court Of Judicature For ... on 29 April, 2026
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2026:RJ-JD:20289-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4423/2026
Anil Kumar S/o Shri Nand Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vpo
Lakhasar 6 Lks Tehsil Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jodhpur,
Through Its Registrar General.
2. The Registrar (Examination), The High Court, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shardul Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aniket Tater
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
29/04/2026
1. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the
controversy involved in the present petition is no more res-
integra, as it is decided by this Court in Narendra Singh
Chauhan & The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At
Jodhpur & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2237/2026) and
other connected matter, decided on 06.03.2026, which is
reproduced as under:-
"1. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that
the recruitment process for the post of "Junior Judicial
Assistant" for the establishment of the Rajasthan High
Court, Jodhpur was considered in the judgment rendered
in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7654/2023, Rajat Yadav v.
Rajasthan High Court & Ors. and other connected writ
petitions, decided on 18.09.2023. The Division Bench of
this Court at Jaipur Bench disposed of the aforesaid writ
(Uploaded on 29/04/2026 at 02:47:15 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20289-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-4423/2026]
petition along with other connected matters with the
following directions:-
"9.29 Consequently, all these petitions are disposed off
with following directions:-
(C) If, as a result of aforesaid exercise, it is found that the
petitioners herein have been accommodated either in the
Open/General category list or there respective reserve
category list then:-
(i) If they have already been allowed to
provisionally appear in the Typewriting Test on
Computer, subject to they having secured
minimum qualifying marks in Typewriting Test,
their
aggregate marks obtained in the written
examination and Typewriting Test shall be drawn
up.
(ii) Those, who have not been allowed to
provisionally appear in the Typewriting Test, they
will be entitled to appear in the Typewriting Test
and for this purpose, the respondents shall hold
Typewriting Test on Computer for such
candidates, subject to they having obtained
minimum qualifying marks in the Typewriting
Test, their aggregate marks obtained in written
examination and
Typewriting Test shall also be drawn up.
(D) The merit list in the Open/General category
and the respective reserve category shall be re-
worked. If the petitioners herein are included
either in the Open/General category list on the
basis of their merit, they shall be offered
appointment against
posts in General/Open category, subject to the
condition that they are fulfilling all other
requirements. Similarly, those petitioners, who
have been able to secure a place in the merit list
of their
(Uploaded on 29/04/2026 at 02:47:15 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20289-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-4423/2026]
respective reserve category would be offered
appointment against posts in their respective
reserved category, subject to fulfilling all other
conditions."
1.1 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
"Rajasthan High Court & Anr. v. Rajat Yadav & Ors.", Civil
Appeal No.14112/2024, decided on 19.12.2025, observed
in paragraph Nos.71 and 77 as follows:-
"71. In the milieu of facts, none of the
petitioning candidates has been shown to
have availed of any concession/relaxation. No
law - either rule or executive instruction -
has been shown which prevented the High
Court from treating the reserved candidates
as General/Open candidates once it
transpired that they outshone the latter.
Question of any migration or deriving twin
benefits of migration did not and could not
arise in the circumstances.
77. While considering the cases of the
petitioning candidates, the High Court may
endeavour not to dislodge employees in
position, as expressed by the Division Bench,
as far as possible."
1.2 As it is evident from the orders passed by the
Division Bench of this Court as well as the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, the directions were confined only to the
petitioners in the said matters. Any prolonged litigation
initiated after the selection process has long been
concluded and after the judgment in Rajat Yadav (supra)
has already been implemented, such litigation cannot be
entertained, as it would result in a never-ending process
of challenges and review of the recruitment, which would
not be conducive to maintaining the sanctity of the
selection process. The directions of the Division Bench of
this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly indicate
(Uploaded on 29/04/2026 at 02:47:15 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20289-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-4423/2026]
that the benefits accrue only to those persons who, were
vigilant and approached the Court in time, and the
judgments are in personam in nature.
2. At this stage, it is also informed that the petitioner-
Narendra Singh Chauhan in D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.2237/2026, could not clear the Typewriting Test,
though he had appeared in the said test pursuant to an
interim order dated 30.01.2026. It is further submitted
that there was no interim order operating in favour of the
present petitioners namely Ramakishan & Puran Sharma.
3. In light of the submissions made by learned counsel
for the respondents, this Court is of the view that once the
Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Division Bench of this
Court have clarified that the judgments operate in
personam, the benefit of the same cannot be extended at
such a belated stage. Reopening the controversy after the
judgments have already been implemented and complied
with would only create uncertainty, and confusion in the
recruitment process, which cannot be permitted.
4. Accordingly, the present Civil Writ Petitions stand
dismissed."
2. In light of the aforequoted order, the present writ petition
also stands dismissed in the same terms as in Narendra Singh
Chauhan (supra). Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
23-nirmala/-
(Uploaded on 29/04/2026 at 02:47:15 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
