Petitioner challenged non-selection as Agriculture Supervisor claiming incorrect answer key. Court dismissed writ petition due to seven-year delay and closed selection process, holding no case for judicial interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10155/2015
Anil Kumar Meena S/o Munna Lal Meena, Village Meena Seemla Post Udaipura District Dusa.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmendra Jain. For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order
27/06/2022
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayer:-
“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may very graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to:
I) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof thereby, the answer of Question No. 36,41,47,61 and 64 of question booklet SERIES ‘B’ given by the respondents in the answer-keys for the post of AGRICULTURE SUPERVISOR may kindly be declared incorrect and the same be corrected as follows:
| Question No. | Petitioner’s Answer |
|---|---|
| 36. | (4) |
| 41. | (3) |
| 47 | (2) |
| 61 | (2) |
| 64 | (2) |
ii) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby; direct rectify the error committed in the
(2 of 2)
[CW-10155/2015]
answer key of the petitioner should be awarded more marks according to his OMR Sheet and respondent be further directed to award marks for the correct answers to the petitioner.
iii) Alternatively, Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof thereby direct the respondents to constitute an expert and independent committee for rectifying the error committed in the answer key of question Booklet series ‘B’.
iv) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby; direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Agriculture Supervisor.
v) Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner. vi) Cost of the writ, petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioner.
Brief facts of the case are that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 29.05.2013 issued by the respondents for the post of Agriculture Supervisor the petitioner applied for the said post, however, after participating in the selection process the petitioner remained unsuccessful and has challenged his non-selection in this writ petition on the ground of incorrect answer-key.
Admittedly, the advertisement in question was issued by the respondents in the year 2013 and the petitioner has filed this writ petition in the year 2015, in my considered view, the selection process for the post in question has already been over, therefore, after a delay of seven years, no case is made out for interference by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
MG/49
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in selection proceedings for the post of Agriculture Supervisor after a delay of seven years.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anil Kumar Meena
The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Director, Department Of Agriculture, Rajasthan, Jaipur
The Coordinator, Agriculture Supervisior Recruitment Examination-2013, Swami Keshwanand Agricultura, Bikaner
Inderjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
