Dismissed¶¶49

Tej Singh Dhabhai S/O Late Sundar Lal Dhabhai v. Registrar General

Rajasthan HC7 Jan 2026CW/9370/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

infructuous writ petition; no cause of action survives; efflux of time renders petition infructuous; OBC (NCL) certificate issued after cut-off date; relate-back of caste/income certificate to pre-cut-off period; Rajasthan High Court direct recruitment District Judge 2020; Notification No. RHC/Exam Cell/RJS/DJC/2021/05 dated 05.01.2021; candidature rejection notice dated 04.06.2022; stay application No. 9758/2022 dismissed 19.07.2022; main exam 23.07.2022 & 24.07.2022; petitioner unrepresented; recruitment process completed; subsequent year fresh recruitment initiated; petitions dismissed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The examination process had already been completed and a further recruitment process had been initiated by the respondents in the subsequent year. ¶¶43

Tej Singh Dhabhai S/O Late Sundar Lal Dhabhai Vs Registrar General — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶49

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's candidature in the OBC (NCL) category for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judge, 2020 (Notification dated 05.01.2021) — rejected vide notice dated 04.06.2022 despite his OBC certificates dated 1.1.2019 and 27.10.2021 — ought to be quashed/reconsidered so as to permit him to participate in the main examination and, if meritorious, be appointed.

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

The examination process had already been completed and a further recruitment process had been initiated by the respondents in the subsequent year.

¶¶43

Key takeaways

No cause of action survives for pursuing the writ petitions; with the efflux of time the petitions have been rendered infructuous, and they are dismissed as such. The Court did not adjudicate the merits of the OBC (NCL) certificate cut-off/relate-back contention.ratio¶¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Division Bench, Jaipur) — Common order dated 07/01/2026 in D.B. Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 9908/2022 and 9370/2022. The petitioners had challenged a notice dated 04.06.2022 rejecting their candidature in the OBC (NCL) category for the competitive examination for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judge, 2020 (Notification No. RHC/Exam Cell/RJS/DJC/2021/05 dated 05.01.2021), seeking consideration on their OBC certificates dated 1.1.2019/27.10.2021 and participation in the main examination scheduled for 23.07.2022 & 24.07.2022. A co-ordinate Bench had, on 19.07.2022, dismissed the stay application (No. 9758/2022), recording the petitioner's contention that a post-cut-off-date OBC (NCL) certificate relates back to the period prior to the 31.03.2021 application cut-off, against the respondents' stance that such a certificate certifies status only for one year forward from issuance. When the matters were heard, no one appeared for the petitioners. Noting that the examination process stood completed and that a further recruitment process had been initiated in the subsequent year, the Division Bench held that no cause of action survived and that the petitions had been rendered infructuous with the efflux of time, and dismissed them accordingly — without adjudicating the OBC (NCL) certificate relate-back question on merits. Per INDERJEET SINGH and RAVI CHIRANIA, JJ.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:392-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9908/2022

¶4

Rajendra Singh Samota S/o Shri Roopa Ram Choudhary, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Plot No. 8, Shiv Colony, Sector No. 8, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur Through Registrar General

¶8

Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

Connected With

¶11

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9370/2022

¶12

Tej Singh Dhabhai S/o Late Sundar Lal Dhabhai, Aged About 41 Years, R/o H.no. 2, Opp Godawari Dham, Rawatbhata Road, Kota, Rajasthan.

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

1. Registrar General, High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan, Jodhpur.

¶16

1. Registrar Examination, High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan, Jodhpur.

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr.Ashish Sharma

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

¶20

Order

¶21

07/01/2026

¶22

At the first round, no one has put in appearance on behalf of petitioners and the matter was passed over. Even in the second round, no one has put in appearance on their behalf.

(2 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:392-DB]

[CW-9908/2022]

These two writ petitions are being decided by the common order, as the facts and issues involved are similar. For convenience, the facts are being taken from D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9908/2022.

¶27

This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

¶28

(i) by an appropriate writ order or direction the impugned notice dated 04.06.2022 issued by the respondents to the extent of candidature of petitioner has been rejected, may kindly be quashed and set aside.

¶29

(ii) by an appropriate writ order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of petitioner in OBC (NCL) category by considering his OBC certificates either dated 1.1.2019 or 27.10.2021 and allow the petitioner to participate in the main exam scheduled to be held on 23.07.2022 & 24.07.2022 and if the petitioner found place in merit he may be given appointment to the post of Cadre of District Judge under OBC Category with all consequential benefit.

¶30

(iii) Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

¶31

The issue involved in the present writ petition relates to Notification No. RHC/Exam Cell/RJS/DJC/2021/05 dated 05.01.2021 by which applications were invited for competitive examination for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judge, 2020.

¶32

The co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.07.2022 has dismissed the stay application filed on behalf of

(3 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:392-DB]

[CW-9908/2022]

the petitioners considering the issue involved in the present writ petition, which reads as under:-

¶37

“Heard on prayer for interim relief.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that even though certificate of OBC (NCL) was issued in petitioner’s favour after the cut off date, the status of OBC(NCL) is granted on the basis of economic status prior to the date of issuance of certificate. The certificate issued in favour of the petitioner after the cut off date and submitted before the authority would relate back to the period prior to cut off date of submission of application form, i.e., 31.03.2021 and, therefore, the petitioner is required to be treated as eligible.

¶39

On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that a certificate of OBC (NCL) takes effect for a period of one year from the date of issuance of certificate and it is not a certificate, which could be used to claim status of OBC(NCL) in respect of the period prior to issuance of certificate in view of the Government’s circulars which provide that such certificate only certifies OBC(NCL) status for a period of one year from the date of issuance of certificate and not prior to that.

¶40

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, in our opinion, no case is made out for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.

¶41

Stay Application No. 9758/2022 is rejected.

¶42

Writ petition be listed for hearing after three weeks.”

¶43

In our considered view, the process of examination as informed by learned counsel for the respondents has already been completed and

(4 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:392-DB]

[CW-9908/2022]

thereafter in the subsequent year, one more recruitment process has been initiated by the respondents.

¶48

In our considered view, no cause of action survives for pursuing these writ petitions and with the efflux of time, petitions have been rendered infructuous.

¶49

Accordingly the writ petitions are dismissed as rendered infructuous.

¶50

(RAVI CHIRANIA),J

¶51

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

¶52

Monika/30-31

Tej Singh Dhabhai S/O Late Sundar Lal Dhabhai v. Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tej Singh Dhabhai S/O Late Sundar Lal Dhabhai v. Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited Vs Ramnath Saini S/O Sh. Mali Ram Saini

Rajesh Bishnoi S/O Barsingha Ram Vs Union of India

Sanjay Chouhan S/O Sh. Vijay Babu Vs the Union of India

Shri Jagdish Son of Shri Sanwal Vs the Urban Improvement Trust

Jamna Prasad Sharma S/O Shri Brij Lal Sharma Vs Chairman

Rajendra Singh Samota S/O Shri Roopa Ram Choudhary Vs Rajasthan High Court