CW/21593/2013 of MADHU SHARMA Vs STATE PANCHAYATI RAJ DEP ANR on 20 December 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANAT JAIPUR BENCH

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21593/2013

Madhu Sharma

Versus

State of Rajasthan & Anr.

DATE OF ORDER : 20/12/2013HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

Mr. Sandeep Kalwaniya, for petitioner(s)

***

It is stated that petitioner(s) secured more marks than the candidates given appointment. He/She/They want(s) to makerepresentation along with required documents.

In view of the prayer made above, writ petition so as stayapplication are disposed of with liberty to make representation.The respondents would then consider the representation andpass speaking order regarding grievance of the petitioner(s). Ifany person less meritorious has been given appointment andpetitioner(s) is/are otherwise eligible for the post, his/her/theirrepresentation may be considered accordingly.

The order should not mean that without taking note ofother circumstances, appointment to be given to thepetitioner(s). If there are justified reasons, then order can bepassed denying benefit but by a speaking order.

[M.N.BHANDARI], J.

“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/orderbeing emailed.”

FATEH RAJ BOHRA, P.A.