Disposed

Sandeep Choudhary v. Union of India

Rajasthan HC11 Dec 2023CW/1266/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the marking of a physical test (beem up and down), the court held that the petitioner failed to raise this issue before the respondent authority. Liberty was granted to file a fresh representation within 10 days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondents within 10 days, to be considered within three months.

Sandeep Choudhary Vs Union of India — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2023)

(1 of 2)

[2023:RJ-JD:42971]

[CW-1266/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶5

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1266/2023

¶6

Sandeep Choudhary S/o Shri Narayan Ram, Aged About 22 Years, B/c Jat, Resident Of Village Nandoli Meratiya, Tehsil Makrana, District Nagaur (Rajasthan).

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

Union Of India, Ministry Of Defence, New Delhi (India). 2. Directorate General Of Recruiting Authority, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Army Recruitment Officer, Jodhpur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhanwar Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Raika for Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, Dy. GC Capt. Govind, OIC Legal, Indian Army

¶12

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI Order

¶13

11/12/2023

¶14

In an identical matter, this Hon’ble Court had passed the following order in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1449/2023 (Jitendra Saran Vs. Union of India & Ors.) on 25.07.2023:-

¶15

“The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

¶16

“a) By an appropriate writ, order or directions this Hon’ble Court may kindly be directed to the Respondents authority to shown/called the Videography which was conducted by them at the time of candidates were given their physical test i.e. 10 beem/up down hanging in the interest of justice; and

¶17

b) By an appropriate writ, order or directions the 21 marks given by the Recruitment authority i.e. Respondent authority may kindly be declared illegal, unjust in the interest of justice and further petitioner may be treated as physical test pass out candidate in the interest of justice.”

(2 of 2)

[2023:RJ-JD:42971]

[CW-1266/2023]

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the WhatsApp of the Videography has been received by him as sent by the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, therefore, the relief prayed for in the writ petition has been granted and the same has become infructuous. Dismissed accordingly.”

¶22

In the present matter, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner and counsel has seen the videography on whatsapp, but it reflects that the physical test i.e. particularly beem up and down has not been counted in a proper manner.

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondent along with officer present in person submit that regarding the issue of counting of beem, no proper representation has been given by the petitioner to the respondents before approaching this Hon'ble Court and thus, the issue was never raised by the petitioner before them.

¶24

3.1 In the meanwhile, the officer has also furnished a policy for conduct of beem test, which is also perused by this Court. 4. In light of the aforesaid submission, the present petition is disposed of while giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondents within a period of 10 from today, which shall be considered and decided by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law.

¶25

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶26

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶27

67-Sudheer/-

Sandeep Choudhary v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Choudhary v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Peeyush Vs the State of Rajasthan

Naresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Gopaldas Soni Vs R. Venkateswaran

Shivshanker Vs State of Rajasthan

Badu Vs Raj.Civil Ser. Appl. Tri. , Jaipur and Ors.

Gopal Lal Joshi Vs State and Ors.