Dismissed

Sunil Vishnoi v. Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan HC27 Sept 2023CW/7754/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench held that a hearing was not required as the controversy was covered by a related Division Bench decision. The petition was disposed of in terms of that judgment regarding merit list revision for the Rajasthan High Court recruitment.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the judgment passed by the Division Bench in DB Civil Writ Petition No.7654/2023.

Sunil Vishnoi Vs Rajasthan High Court — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7754/2023

¶3

Sunil Vishnoi S/o Deva Ram, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Aguni Dhani, Hemnagar, Joliyali, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rajasthan High Court, Through Its Registrar General.

¶7

Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chayan Bothra for Mr. Sachin Aacharya, Sr. Advocate

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

¶11

Order

¶12

27/09/2023

¶13

Learned counsels for the parties are an agreement that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of Division Bench of this Court at Jaipur Bench passed in DB Civil Writ Petition No.7654/2023 (Rajat Yadav vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.) and other connected writ petitions decided on 18.09.2023. The Division Bench of this Court at Jaipur Bench has disposed of above-referred writ petition along with other connected matters with the following directions :-

¶14

“9.29 Consequently, all these petitions are disposed off with following directions:

¶15

(A) Respondents shall undertake an exercise of revision of category wise list by including in the Open/General category list, those candidates of reserve category, who have secured more marks in the written examination provided they have not taken or availed of any special benefit which may

¶16

[CW-7754/2023]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

dis-entitle them from being considered against Open/General category post.

¶19

(B) After drawing the Open/General category list, the list of respective reserve category shall be drawn up.

¶20

(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:

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(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 respective reserve category would be offered appointment against posts in their respective reserved category, subject to fulfilling all other conditions.

¶24

(E) It goes without saying that while undertaking revision of the list, provisions contained in (i) to (v) under Section B of Clause 15 of the advertisement shall have to be followed.

¶25

(F) If no vacant posts are available, less meritorious candidates, who have been appointed in Open category or reserve category,as the case may be, are required to be terminated.

¶26

[CW-7754/2023]

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

9.30 Aforesaid directions are being issued as the appointments were not made till the date of conclusion of hearing.”

¶29

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment passed by the Division bench of this Court at Jaipur Bench in DB Civil Writ Petition No.7564/2023 (Rajat Yadav vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.) and other connected writ petitions decided on 18.09.2023.

¶30

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶31

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶32

90-Ajaysingh/-

Sunil Vishnoi v. Rajasthan High Court

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Vishnoi v. Rajasthan High Court

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar @ Kd Vs State of Rajasthan

Revant Ram @ Rati Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Pokar Ram Vs Doli Banam Mandir Shri Mahadevji (Jaikalnath)

Kana Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Ram Lal Nayak Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ami Lal Vs State of Rajasthan