Shambhu Singh Rajput @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to call him for document verification and consequently give

appointment to the petitioner on the post of Teacher Gr.III (Level II) Subject English pursuant to the advertisement dated 11/9/2017 (Annex.5).

The petitioner had applied for the post of Teacher Gr.III (Level II) in the recruitment-2016 and filed application on 31/7/2016, the said recruitment

2016 was re-advertised with amendment pursuant to the judgment of this Court in Sher Singh vs. State of Rajasthan : D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.

1464/2016 decided on 27/4/2017, wherein, it was specifically indicated that those who had already applied were required to update their data online

and in absence whereof the application already filed would not be valid. The last date fixed for such updating was 11/10/2017, which was extended to

10/11/2017, however, it is claimed that petitioner being unaware of such requirement, did not do the needful.

Petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4681/2018, seeking similar reliefs as claimed in the present writ petition which was decided on 3.4.2018 as

under:-

“2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the matter at length does not want to press this writ petition, however, seeks liberty to file

representation before the respondents ventilating his grievance.

In view of the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to sympathetically consider representation of

the petitioner by passing a speaking order within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.â€​

Petitioner made a representation, which it is claimed has not been decided. Now the present writ petition has been filed again seeking direction to the

respondents for granting him appointment as in the list dated 20/8/2018 published by the respondents, the petitioner would have higher marks than the

cut off indicated therein.

Learned counsel for the respondent appearing on caveat submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief inasmuch as the last date for online

updation of data is long over on 10/11/2017 and the petitioner having once failed has now again chosen to approach this Court for which there is no

explanation. Submissions have been made that merely because in the cut-off now indicated on account of reshuffling by order dated 20/8/2018

(Annex.13), the petitioner finds himself within the cut-off cannot be a reason now to accept the documents and disturb the selections. I have

considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

The dates are not in dispute where the petitioner was required to update the data qua the application filed by him pursuant to the initial advertisement

issued in the year 2016, the petitioner had sufficient time thereafter for the purpose of updation by approaching the respondents and/or taking

appropriate steps, however, the petitioner had not taken any steps in this regard, approached the Court by filing SBCW No.4681/2018, not pressed the

same and now the petitioner has again filed writ petition seeking direction, which cannot be countenanced as the recruitment, as per the submission

made by the learned counsel for the respondents, has already been concluded and grant of permission to the petitioner now is likely to open fresh

avenue for other similarly situated candidates, which would result in undesirable consequences in the recruitment. In view of the above discussion,

there is no substance in the writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed.