[2025:RJ-JP:24920] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 24206/2018 Kuldeep Chauhan S/o Prem Chand Chauhan, Aged About 26 Years, By Caste Raval, Resident Of Sulabh Complex Ke Pas, Puran Khati Ki Gali, Near Bus Stand, Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Additional Chief Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. Director, Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Additional Director (Administration), Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Chhaya Sharma for Mr. Abhishek Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 07/07/2025 1. An application (1/2020) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by and on behalf of petitioner seeking re-constitution of file of the original writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24206/2018 (Kuldeep Chauhan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). However, in the meanwhile, the original file of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24206/2018 has been traced in the [2025:RJ-JP:24920] (2 of 2) [CW-24206/2018] Office, hence the application (1/2020) is dismissed as having become infructuous. 2. It appears from the previous order-sheets that on behalf of petitioner, the writ petition was not pursued vigilantly, and on previous occasion i.e. on 08.01.2025, no one appeared on behalf of petitioner to pursue the writ petition. 3. A perusal of the writ petition goes to show that the petitioner filed the original writ petition back in the year 2018, seeking correction of date of birth in his Online Application Form, filled by him for the post of Lab Assistant, pursuant to the vacancies notified on 29.05.2018. Obviously, the recruitment for appointment on the vacancies, notified under advertisement dated 29.05.2018, must have been completed already and further, the petitioner is not able to show survival of cause of action. 4. Considering the nature of relief prayed for, it appears that the writ petition has rendered infructuous with passage of time. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. (SUDESH BANSAL),J TN/39