Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Jitendra Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Jitendra Kumar Sharma vs State of Rajasthan and ors.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Rajasthan Decided Feb 26, 2003
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/751943

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1777 of 2003
Subject
Service
Disposition
Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Service
Outcome / disposition
Petition dismissed
Acts & sections
Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jitendra Kumar Sharma

Advocate S.K. Sharma, Adv.

Respondent

State of Rajasthan and ors.

Legal References

Acts
Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957
Reported In
RLW2003(2)Raj963; 2003(2)WLC656

Excerpt

- parihar, j.1. coffers are being dug to find life in the coffins, the final nails on which had already been put by the supreme court long back.2. petitioners are seeking appointment on the post of lower division clerk in pursuance to the selections made by the rajasthan public service commission vide advertisement issued way back in the year 1986. the whole controversy has been concluded by the supreme court by issuing necessary directions. the presence writ petition has been filed after more than 16 years, mainly on the ground that since the persons, who had been given appointment might not have joined, the petitioners should be given appointment in their place from the select list prepared for the year 1986.3. the contention as raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is wholly misconceived and itself will be violative of articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of india if any such directions are issued by this court after more than a decade of the completion of the whole selections process. even otherwise, the life of select list as also the reserve list is only six months as per provisions, of the rajasthan subordinate offices ministerial staff rules 1957 under which the present selections have been made and the period been over long back. the court cannot shut its eyes on such frivolous and misconceived pleas and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed with an exemplary cost. however, looking to the circumstances of the petitioner who seems to have made to believe unbelievable, i refrain to do so.4. the writ petition is dismissed accordingly as having no merit.

Full Judgment

Parihar, J.

1. Coffers are being dug to find life in the coffins, the final nails on which had already been put by the Supreme Court long back.

2. Petitioners are seeking appointment on the post of Lower Division Clerk in pursuance to the selections made by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission vide advertisement issued way back in the year 1986. The whole controversy has been concluded by the Supreme Court by issuing necessary directions. The presence writ petition has been filed after more than 16 years, mainly on the ground that since the persons, who had been given appointment might not have joined, the petitioners should be given appointment in their place from the select list prepared for the year 1986.

3. The contention as raised by the Petitioner in the present writ petition is wholly misconceived and itself will be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India if any such directions are issued by this Court after more than a decade of the completion of the whole selections process. Even otherwise, the life of select list as also the reserve list is only six months as per provisions, of the Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Ministerial Staff Rules 1957 under which the present selections have been made and the period been over long back. The court cannot shut its eyes on such frivolous and misconceived pleas and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed with an exemplary cost. However, looking to the circumstances of the petitioner who seems to have made to believe unbelievable, I refrain to do so.

4. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly as having no merit.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial