[2025:RJ-JP:31478] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9671/2025 Ramkishor Tada S/o Om Prakash Tada, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, VPO Kuchor Aguni, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Medical And Health (Group-2), Government of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Rajasthan University of Health Science, Kumbha Marg, Sector-18, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Through Its Registrar. 4. The Coordinator, Medical Officer (Medical) Recruitment- 2025, Rajasthan University Of Health Science, Kumbha Marg, Sector-18, Tonk Road, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.F. Baig HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 13/08/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Respondents for an alleged discrepancy in the score card of the Petitioner, which was published by the Respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner possesses all the required qualifications for the post of Medical Officer (Medical) under the category of OBC-NCL. He further submits that the Petitioner appeared in the examination on 27.04.2025 and the final answer key was issued on 14.05.2025 (Annexure-5). Thereafter, when the Petitioner compared his OMR sheet with the answer key, he was securing 67 marks. However, when the Respondent issued the Provisional Score List on [2025:RJ-JP:31478] (2 of 2) [CW-9671/2025] 14.05.2025 (Annexure-7), the name of the Petitioner was reflected at S.No. 1935 with 66 marks. He further submits that the Petitioner has also served a representation in the office of Respondent No.3 highlighting the said error but till date he has not received any response. He further submits that due to an error or technical glitch in scanning at the end of the Respondents, his candidature has been adversely affected as the score of the Petitioner has been reduced to 66 instead of 67 marks as per OMR sheet of the petitioner annexed with the writ petition. He further submits that he would be more than satisfied if his grievances/representation is adddressed in a time frame. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the bar and perused the material available on record. 4. In view of the submissions made in the present writ petition, the Respondent No.3 is directed to decide the representation submitted by the Petitioner (Annexure-9) within a period of four weeks from today by a speaking order strictly in accordance with law. 5. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction to decide such representation has been issued only with a view to ensure an expeditious redressal of the petitioner’s grievance. The same shall not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to file afresh, if need arises. 7. All the pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-43