[2025:RJ-JP:43590] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16266/2025 Minakshi Jaiman D/o Krishan Avtar Jaiman, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Mali Mohhalla Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar 301408, Rajasthan Roll No. 106759. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer, Rajasthan. 3. The Joint Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhawani Singh Shekhawat Mr. Nemi Chand Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr.. M.F. Baig HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 30/10/2025 1. Mr. M.F. Baig is appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and accepts notice. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has applied in the category of General, Women, EWS for the post of Food Safety Officer. He further submits that after interview, the petitioner has secured 60.38 marks whereas the last cut off for General Women EWS category was 53.11 but still the petitioner was not selected for the post and petitioner has submitted a representation to the RPSC but same has neither been considered nor decided. [2025:RJ-JP:43590] (2 of 2) [CW-16266/2025] 3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the petitioner may submit fresh representation enclosing a copy of previous representation and on basis of fresh grounds, the RPSC will consider and decide the representation, as early as possible. 4. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for parties, it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at this stage with liberty to file a representation. 5. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents-Authority within a period of 30 days raising all grounds and the respondents-Authority are directed to decide the representation with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After the order, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the decision to the petitioner either by way of speed post or through E-mail, if petitioner has provided E-mail in her representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, she has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /51