[2025:RJ-JP:34219] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 114/2023 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10698/2021 Smt. Ritu D/o Sh. Manohar Lal, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Makri, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, Sikar (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner. 3. The District Education Officer (Elementary Education), Jhalawar. 4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jhalawar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dikshant Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sachin Singh Rathore for Mr. S.S. Naruka-AAG JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/08/2025 1. Matter comes upon misc. application for recalling the order dated 08.03.2023 passed by this Court while deciding the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10698/2021 submitted by the petitioner. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that three persons who have secured less marks in comparison with the petitioner, have been given appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III Science and Maths whereas the petitioner has secured more marks but [2025:RJ-JP:34219] (2 of 3) [WMAP-114/2023] inspite of the above, her candidature was not considered for appointment on the said post. Counsel submits that when the matter was listed and heard by this Court on 08.03.2023, this fact could not be brought into the notice of this Court and the writ petition submitted by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that she failed to secure the cut off marks in her category, hence under these circumstances, the aforesaid order dated 08.03.2023 be recalled and the writ petition be restored to its original number. 3. Per contra, counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner has participated in the selection process for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III Science and Maths under the category of OBC Female and the last cut off marks in the said category is 114.36 while the petitioner has secured 113.93 marks hence, her candidature was not considered for appointment. Counsel submits that so far as the prayer for giving appointment to other female candidates of the same category is concerned, they were given appointment on the basis of their original marks and the original merit list prepared on the basis of the first result. Counsel submits that subsequently, certain candidates approached this Court assailing the validity of the questions-answers and those petitions were entertained and thereafter questions-answers were re-evaluated and the result was revised and this time, the cut off marks for each category were increased. Counsel submits that this Court has protected the rights of all those selected candidates who were given appointment on the basis of the original result and not the revised result, hence under these circumstances, the petitioner has no [2025:RJ-JP:34219] (3 of 3) [WMAP-114/2023] case to make comparison with the other candidates who were given appointment on the basis of the first original result. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the respondents and looking to the fact that neither in the first result and nor in the second result, the petitioner has secured the cut off marks in her category whereas the other candidates who have secured more than cut off marks in the original result which was declared prior to the revised result and this Court has already protected the rights of the selected candidates when the result was revised at the subsequent stage, this Court finds no reason to recall the order dated 08.03.2023 passed by this Court. 6. Accordingly, the present misc. application stands dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/140