HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3736/2015 Priyanka Indolia D/o Shri Balveer Singh Indolia, Village Bijwari, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary-Cum- Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Dy. Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Chief Executive Officer-Cum- Additional Examination Controller, Zila Parishad, Jaisalmer. 4. The Secretary, National Council Of Teacher Education, Wing-2, Hans Bhawan, Bahadurshah Jafar Marg, New Delhi-110002. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3731/2015 Renu Verma daughter of Girdhari Lal Verma aged about 28 years, R/o 11, Shiv Colony Opposite Panchmukhi Hanumanji Bas Badanpura Bahar, Ramgarh More, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Department of rural Development and Panchayat Raj Government of Rajasthan, government Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Government of Rajasthan, government of Secretariat, Jaipur 3. The Secretary, National council of Teacher Education, New Delhi 4. The additional Examination Controller and Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dausa. ----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3755/2015 Muniraj Meena son of Shri Rameshwar Prasad Meena, aged about 24 years, R/o Village Gudachandraji, Tehsil Nadoti, District (2 of 2) [CW-3736/2015] Karauli (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayatiraj Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Secretary cum Commissioner, Rural Development, and Panchayatiraj Department, government, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. Chief Executive Officer cum Additional Examination controller, Zila Parishad Barmer (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None Present For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 22/01/2025 The instant matter pertain to the year 2015. None has marked appearance qua the petitioners. Upon perusal of the Court file, it is noted that ever since filing of the petition no sincere efforts are taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner to contest the matter. Moreover, it can be deduced that during the currency of the petition much water has flown. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed in default. However, the petitioner(s) will be at a liberty to revive the petition if the lis in question still survives or if deemed essential. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J DIKSHA MISHRA /67-69