[2025:RJ-JP:6564-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Review Petition No. 129/2024 IN D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16739/2022 1. Bhola Shankar Meena S/o Shri Ramnath Meena, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Kalanala, Post Dabeta, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi, Rajasthan. 2. Praveen Meena S/o Shri Ramchandra Meena, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village And Post Pech Ki Bawadi, Tehsil Hindoli, District Bundi, Rajasthan. 3. Chandra Prakash S/o Prahlad Meena, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Delpura, Post Guda Dewani, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi, Rajasthan. 4. Satyanarayan Meena S/o Sultan Meena, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Haripura, Post Bhajneri, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi, Rajasthan. 5. Sonu Meena S/o Mahaveer Meena, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Dugari, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi, Rajasthan. ----Review Petitioner/Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of School Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur 3. Director, Secondary Education Rajasthan Bikaner. 4. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur Through Chairman State Agriculture Management Institution Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur. 5. Manejer Meena S/o Ram Prakash Meena, aged about 26 years, R/o Village Delpura, Post Guda Dewani, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi. 6. Mainager Meena S/o Foru Lal Meena, aged about 25 yearsm, R/o Village Kalanala, Post Dabeta, Teshil Nainwa, District Bundi 7. Shiv Prakash Meena S/o Bhanwar Lal Meena, aged about [2025:RJ-JP:6564-DB] (2 of 2) [WRW-129/2024] 21 years, R/o Village Mundli, Post Sadera, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishan Kumar Sharma with Mr. Aditya Sharma & Mr. Gaurav Pareek For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 14/02/2025 1. The Review Petition, if we may say so, is absolutely misconceived. The challenge to the validity of the Rule that minimum qualifying marks/cut off marks should not have been provided and it affects various reserved categories and many a times posts are not filled and remain vacant, was taken into consideration by this Court. To reiterate, it is trite law that prescription of minimum qualifying marks by itself would not render a rule arbitrary or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, there is no ground to review the order passed by this Court. 2. Accordingly, the Review Petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ N. Gandhi/JKP-8