MAKHAN LAL YADAV S/O SHRI MAHADEV PRASAD YADAV v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/5076/2025 · 2025-08-18
Sanjeet Purohit, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13744 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 13744 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:32155-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5076/2025
1. Makhan Lal Yadav S/o Shri Mahadev Prasad Yadav, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of 21-A, Raman Vihar- A, Near Ajmer Byepass, Machada ,murlipura, Jaipur
2. Rohit Kumar Jain S/o Shri Shanti Lal Jain, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of A-789, R.k. Puram, Kota- 324010
3. Vikas Kumar S/o Shri Ramvijay Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Aurangabad, Bihar
4. Manish Verma S/o Shri Gurudayal Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Ramdevv Purana Mandir Ke Pass, Hasampur, Ward No.6, Sikar
5. Rajani Dindor D/o Shri Ramesh Chand, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Palibadi, Pali-Kalan, Banswara, Kushal- garh ----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Medical Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Through Its Registrar, 35, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur
3. National Medical Commission, Through Its Secretary, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka, Phase-I, New Delhi- 110077
4. Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi-110011. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. BS Chhaba, AAG assisted by Ms. Shruti Pareek & Ms. Mansi Sharma Mr. Yash Joshi Mr. Angad Mirdha HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT
[2025:RJ-JP:32155-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-5076/2025]
Order 18/08/2025
1.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-National Medical Commission (NMC) submits that the petitioners have already cleared the examination as per the result declared by the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS).
2.
Learned counsel appearing for RUHS submits that in view of passing of the examination by the petitioners, the writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
3. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.
4. Apparently, for the aforesaid reasons, we, therefore, dismiss this writ petition as having become infructuous. The question of law, however shall be kept open for adjudication.
(SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J RAHUL MIRKHANI/57