Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13123 (RAJ)

SATYENDRA PRAKASH GOAD AND ORS v. STATE OF RAJ AND ORS

CW/5471/2009 · 2025-03-05

Anoop Kumar Dhand

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:9829] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5471/2009 1. Satyendra Prakash Goad, S/O - Shree Kanhaiya lal Sharma, Age-30 years, R/O- Namak, Katara, Bharatpur, Rajasthan 2. Firoj Khan, S/O- Haneef Khan, Age- 31 years, R/O-232, Swaran Jayanti Nagar, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 3. Miss Priti Sharma, D/O- Nemi Chand, Age 26 years, R/O- B, Narain Gate, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 4. Miss Neha Singal, D/O - Dr. M.L. Gupta, Age-24 years, R/O- 249, Rajendra Nagar, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Government, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Commissioner, College Education, Dr. Radhakrishn Shidsha Sankul, J.L.N. Marg, Jaipur. 3. Principal M.S.J. College, Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naman Dhadhich for Mr. Vigyan Shah-AAG JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 05/03/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, an action of the respondents have been assailed on the ground that without availability of the regularly selected candidates by the RPSC, the respondents have discontinued the services of the petitioners. 2. Contents of the writ petition indicate that the petitioners were engaged on contractual basis for a certain period or till the availability of the regularly selected candidates. [2025:RJ-JP:9829] (2 of 2) [CW-5471/2009] 3. At the outset, counsel for the respondents has apprised this Court that during the pendency of this petition, several advertisements were issued by the State for regular appointments and the posts have been filled by regularly selected candidates, hence under these circumstances, no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with this petition and the same has become infructuous. 4. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, this petition stands dismissed as rendered infructuous. 5. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/104