KUNIKA CHAMPAWAT D/O DR. DEEPENDRA SINGH CHAMPAWAT v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/10657/2025 · 2025-08-01
Avneesh Jhingan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24738 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24738 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:29526] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10657/2025 Kunika Champawat D/o Dr. Deependra Singh Champawat, Aged About 26 Years, Permanent R/o 4-M-44 Sector 4, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur Presently Residing At New Delhi. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Commissionerate Of College Education, Department Of College Education, Block-4, Rks Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department Of College Education Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The Director, Commissionerate Of College Education, Block-4, Rks Sankul ,jln Marg, Jaipur.
5. The Joint Director (Academic), Commissionerate Of College Education, Block-4, Rks Sankul ,jln Marg, Jaipur.
6. The Nodal Officer, Swami Vivekananda Scholarship For Academic Excellence,commissionerate Of College Education, Block-4, Rks Sankul ,jln Marg, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora with Mr. Tarun Agarwal, Mr. Bhaskar Agarwal, Ms. Mitali Kaswa, Ms. Chhavi Goyal, Ms. Varuni Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yash Joshi for Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
Order 01/08/2025
1. This petition is filed seeking directions to the respondents to issue the final selection letter under Swami Vivekanand
[2025:RJ-JP:29526] (2 of 3) [CW-10657/2025] Scholarship for Academic Excellence Scheme (for short ‘the scheme’) for the Session 2024-25 to the petitioner.
2.
Brief facts are that petitioner was selected in Monash University, Australia. The petitioner to be eligible for scholarship scheme should have left the job thirty days prior to the commencement of the course. The course in Australia University was to commence on 24.02.2025. The petitioner resigned as a Legal Researcher from this Court w.e.f. 01.02.2025. During the intervening period, the date of commencement of course by the Australian University was revised to 28.07.2025.
3. On 28.07.2025, following order was passed:-
“1. The short controversy involved in the present petition is that the petitioner was not fulfilling condition No.6(vi) of Swami Vivekanand Scholarship for Academic Excellence Scheme of May 2024, whereby she was required to resign one month prior to commencement of the course.
2. The petitioner was in list of selected candidate published in August 2024. The petitioner received an offer letter from Monash University, Australia for the course commencing from 24.02.2025. The commencement date was revised to 28.07.2025.
3. The contention is that from the revised date of commencement of the course the petitioner fulfills the condition stipulated in clause 6(vi).
4. The grievance is that amended date of the similarly situated candidates have been taken into
consideration by the respondent and the petitioner is being discriminated.
5. Reliance is placed upon Annexure 25 of the petition to contend that respondents were duly communicated of revised date, vide email dated
30.06.2025.
6.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the case of the petitioner is still under
consideration.
7. Considering that the time is of the essence, the course of the petitioner has commenced from
[2025:RJ-JP:29526] (3 of 3) [CW-10657/2025] today and she can travel to Australia only after the matter regarding scholarship is decided.
8. Let the case of the petitioner be considered by respondent and decided before 01.08.2025.
9. Put up on 01.08.2025.
10. Copy of this order be given to learned counsel for the respondent under the signature of the Bench Secretary.”
4.
Learned counsel for the respondents on specific instructions submits that case of the petitioner has been reconsidered and decision has been taken to issue her scholarship. The final approval shall be handed over to the petitioner latest by Monday.
5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. In case, there is delay by the respondents in doing the needful, however, considering the time is of essence in controversy, the petitioner shall be at liberty to make mention for the revival of the petition.
(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Chandan/49