[2025:RJ-JP:19852] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19516/2023 1. Vishal Yadav S/o Shanker Lal Yadav, Aged About 28 Years, R/o VPO Pindarma, Tehsil Bagidora, District Banswara, Rajasthan. 2. Indra Pal Singh S/o Manohar Singh Solanki, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Rajput Mohalla, Village Chhotawara, Post Lohariya, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara, Rajasthan. 3. Govind Singh Balla S/o Manohar Singh Balla, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Mamadeo Ki Bhagal Badgulaa, Tehsil Kumbhalgarh, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Chairman, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ravi Chirania HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 12/05/2025 1. Heard counsel for both parties and perused the record. 2. Petitioners are aspirants for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III Level I pursuant to advertisement dated 16.12.2022 and have questioned the answer of few questions from question booklet series No. 136 and consequently prayed to revise the final result dated 31.08.2023. [2025:RJ-JP:19852] (2 of 2) [CW-19516/2023] 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, at the outset, pointed out that questions of which answer has been disputed by the petitioner in the present writ petition, have been considered and the issue has been decided against the petitioner in another writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10358/2023 titled as Nidhi Choudhary Vs. The State of Rajasthan vide order dated 31.05.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, hence, the same questions are not to be re-considered and the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the order dated 31.05.2024 4. Counsel for petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid contention of counsel for respondent and fair enough to admit that the issue has been decided and the Special Appeal filed thereagainst before the Division Bench has been dismissed, therefore, he is agreeable to dispose of the instant writ petition in the light of order dated 31.05.2024 passed in Nidhi Choudhary (supra). 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in terms of order dated 31.05.2024 passed in Nidhi Choudhary (supra). 6. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /109