Dismissed

Bhavesh Kumar Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 May 2023CW/93/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought redress regarding a recruitment advertisement dated 04.12.2019. The court dismissed the writ petition because no post was vacant at the time and the selected candidate was not impleaded, but reserved the option to grant similar relief if a vacancy is subsequently proved.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed due to lack of vacancy and non-impleadment of the selected candidate.

Bhavesh Kumar Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/016734]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 93/2023

¶4

Bhavesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Dhanraj Meena, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Village Aad, Tehsil Dhariyawad, District Pratapgarh (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Department Of Home, Through Its Secretary, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶8

Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lalkothi, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶9

Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Police Head Office, Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶10

Superintendent Of Police, Udiapur, District Udaipur (Raj.).

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. O.P. Sangwa. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶14

Order

¶15

23/05/2023

¶16

Though the plea raised by the petitioner has been accepted in connected writ petition being Aashish Kumar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7352/2021 and other connected matters decided today i.e. 14.12.2021, learned AAG made submissions that in other matters, there was interim order granted by the Court to keep one post vacant, however, as in the present case there was no interim order and factually also, no post pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.12.2019 (Annex.1) is vacant and that the petitioner has not impleaded the selected

[2023/RJJD/016734]

[CW-93/2023]

(2 of 2)

candidate as party – respondent to the present writ petition, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

¶21

In view of the above fact situation, wherein, as per the statement made by learned AAG, no post is vacant at Udaipur, where petitioner had applied, and none of the selected candidate has been impleaded as party-respondent to the present writ petition, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed.

¶22

However, in case, the petitioner is able to point out any vacancy pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.12.2019 (Annex.1) to the respondents, the petitioner would also be entitled to similar relief as granted in the case of Aashish Kumar (supra).

¶23

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶24

24-AnilSingh/-

Bhavesh Kumar Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavesh Kumar Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Smt. Geeta Agarwal Vs Sardar Kamal Jeet Singh

M/S Amba Ji Construction Vs State of Rajasthan

Shri Kanha Ram Saharan Memorial College of Paramedical Sciences Vs State of Rajasthan

Madan Lal Jain Vs Legal Representatives Satya Prakash

Sms College of Paramedical Sciences Vs the State of Rajasthan

Surendra Gelda Vs Girish Lodha