Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25137 (RAJ)

OMPRAKASH JAT SON OF KANHAIYA LAL JAT v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

WRW/177/2022 · 2025-03-06

Inderjeet Singh

Review Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:10213] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 177/2022 IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2081/2022 Omprakash Jat Son Of Kanhaiya Lal Jat, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Village Nangal Bharda, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Education Sec- retary, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secre- tary/ Chairman, State Institute Of Agriculture Manage- ment Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Gouttam. For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 06/03/2025 This review petition has been filed by the petitioner for re- calling of the order dated 09.05.2022 passed by this court. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the University from where the petitioner has got the required cer- tificate is a recognized University and this fact was not considered by this court while deciding the writ petition. He further submits that the petitioner has played the game of ‘Hockey’ whereas the respondents in their reply mentioned that the petitioner partici- pated in the game of ‘Volleyball’. [2025:RJ-JP:10213] (2 of 2) [WRW-177/2022] I have perused the material available on record as well as the order dated 09.05.2022 passed by this Court and I find that the order dated 09.05.2022 was passed in view of the reply sub- mitted by the respondents wherein they specifically stated that the sports certificate obtained by the petitioner from the Univer- sity is not a recognized University. Admittedly, no rejoinder to the reply was filed by the peti- tioner in the writ petition and the said order was passed in the presence of counsel for the petitioner. In that view of the matter, no case is made out to grant the relief prayed for in this review petition. Hence, the review petition is dismissed. (INDERJEET SINGH),J MG/71