[2025:RJ-JP:51244] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10082/2025 Nikita Sharma D/o Jugal Kishor, Aged About 34 Years, R/o House No. 133, Chang Chitar Road Mishra Bhawan Beawer, Ajmer, Rajasthan, 305901 ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Information Technology And Communication, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Commissioner Cum Special Secretary Department Of Information Technology And Communication, Jaipur. 3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, State Institute Of Agriculture Management Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nikhil Kumawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.S. Chabba, AAG with Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Hardik Singh, AAAG, Mr. Satyam Bharadwaj, Vinayam Saran AAAG, Ms. Mahi Choudhary, Ms. Mansi Sharma and Ms. Shruti Pareek, AGC Mr. Narendra Singh Choudhary Mr. Prem Chand Dewanda with Mr. Abhishek Singh Devanda and Mr. Ajay Poonia Ms. Chanchal for Ms. Namita Parihar, Dy.GC Mr. Sandeep Kumar Maheshwari Mr. Manish Bharadwaj for Mr. Nalin G. Narain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 17/12/2025 1. Instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: [2025:RJ-JP:51244] (2 of 3) [CW-10082/2025] a. Quash and set aside the final result dated 15.10.2024. b. Direct to the respondents conduct to phase-II (Type- Test Examination) of the petitioner & re-issue the final selection list. c. Further directed to the respondent's re-issue the final selection list according above prayer and if then petitioner qualify the Phase -II (Type-Test Examination), then the petitioner must allow for the document verification & if she pass the DV then she must allow for the appointment. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that due to temporary disablement, when the petitioner was going to appear in the examination, there was delay in the examination and, on account of such delay, his performance in the examination was affected. He further submits that the law recognizes temporary impairment and the same deserves to be considered in the present case, particularly when the respondents themselves claim to be following international standards. 3. Considered the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and perused the material place on record. 4. The concept of temporary disablement includes cases of accident, sudden sprain or strain of the back, knee or shoulder, ligament rupture, whiplash or concussion arising out of an accident, epilepsy, vertigo, etc., however, in the present case, the petitioner has not been able to justify the ground of temporary disablement. [2025:RJ-JP:51244] (3 of 3) [CW-10082/2025] 5. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief from this Court. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as no interference is warranted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Misc application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /65