Disposed

Manoj Kumar S/O Babu Lal v. the Director

Rajasthan HC19 Jan 2024CW/589/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the guidelines in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18767/2023 (Karishma case). The Court directed re-examination of objectionable questions by an expert body within a specific timeline and modified the submission period for representations to seven days.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with direction to refer objectionable questions to expert body and liberty to petitioners to submit representations within seven days.

Manoj Kumar S/O Babu Lal Vs the Director — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 589/2024

¶3

Manoj Kumar S/o Babu Lal, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Vpo Badakhera, Via Lakheri, Tehsil Indragarh, District Bundi, Rajasthan.

¶4

Banwari Lal S/o Fate Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Krendha, Tehsil Saipau, District Dholpur, Rajasthan.

¶5

Shrawan Dan S/o Ramu Dan, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Vpo Rawat Ka Gaon, Post Kase Ka Gaon, Tehsil Shiv, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶9

Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Chairman, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ram Pratap Saini
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. C.L. Saini, AAG
	Mr. N.S. Choudhary alongwith
	Ms. Nilchil Pal Singh for Staff
	Selection Board

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶13

Judgment / Order

¶14

19/01/2024

¶15

Learned counsels appearing for the parties fairly submit that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2023 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18767/2023

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[CW-589/2024]

¶18

“Karishma & Ors. Vs. The Director of Primary Education,

¶19

Bikaner & Ors.” alongwith other connected matters.

¶20

In case of Karishma (supra) this Court has observed as

¶21

under:-

¶22

“8. In case of Raman Choudhary (supra) the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur has observed as under:-

¶23

“In view of the discussions made above, the present writ petitions are disposed of with a directions to the respondents to refer the questions mentioned in these writ petitions to the experts appointed by them (other than those who had already finalized the objections to the preliminary answer key dated 18.03.2023). The expert body, while re-examining the matter, shall take into account the submissions made in the present writ petitions and thereafter pass appropriate orders with respect to the adjudication made by them on the objectionable questions raised in these writ petitions. The said exercise of examination by the expert body shall be completed within a period of four weeks from today and if the respondents find the report of the expert committee giving any change to the answers adjudicated by them in the final answer key, they will take the appropriate measures for revising the result.

¶24

Needless to say, if the petitioners come in the merit after revision of the result, appropriate action will be taken for processing their case for appointment.

¶25

It is also made clear that question Nos.3, 27 & 50 of the Master Question Paper need not be sent to the expert body for re-examination.”

¶26

9. In view of the above, this Court disposes off these writ petitions with liberty to the petitioners to submit the representation detailing out their specific objections as has been stated in the writ petitions, to the respondents within fifteen days from today. The

¶27

[CW-589/2024]

¶28

(3 of 4)

¶29

respondents on receipt of the representation, shall refer the questions mentioned in the representation to the experts appointed by them (other than those who had already finalized the objections to the preliminary answer key dated 18.03.2023). The Expert Body, while re-examining the matter, shall take into account the averments made in the representation and thereafter, pass appropriate order in respect to the adjudication made by them on the objectionable questions raised in these writ petitions and submit before the respondents by filing the representation. The said exercise of examination by the Expert Body shall be completed within a period of six weeks from today and if the respondents find the report of the Expert Committee giving any change to the answers adjudicated by them in the final answer key, they will take the appropriate measures for revising the result.

¶30

10. Needless to say, if the petitioners come in the merit after revision of the result, appropriate action will be taken for processing their case for appointment.

¶31

11. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the RSSB has already made recommendation to the State Government for giving appointment to the selected candidates on the post of Teacher Grade-III Level-II in various subjects. The respondent-State shall make a mention in the appointment orders to be issued about the order of re-examination of the answer key and in case the result is revised and any person who has also been given appointment prior to the revision of the result, does not find place in the revised merit list, the appointment given to him before revised result will not create any right in his favour to continue.”

¶32

Considering the submissions made by counsels for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed off in terms & conditions as given in case the of Karishma (supra) with a modification that the petitioners may submit their representations within seven days from today.

¶33

(4 of 4)

¶34

[CW-589/2024]

¶35

Since the main petition has been disposed off, the stay applications and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶36

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶37

Gaurav Srivastava/232

Manoj Kumar S/O Babu Lal v. the Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar S/O Babu Lal v. the Director

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

Ramesh Kumar Vaidya Ors. Vs State

Prahlad Ram Yadav S/O Shri Phoolaram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Santosh Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Mohan Lal Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan

Sunita Kumari W/O Shri Bhanwar Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kailash Nath S/O Satya Narayan Vs the Director, Elementary Education

Ranveer Singh Yadav Son of Shriram Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan