DR. ADITYA SINGH S/O SHRI NARENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/9406/2026 · 2026-08-20
Sudesh Bansal
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13499 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13499 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:33573] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9406/2026 CNR: RJHC020486672026 | URN: CW / 21042U / 2026 Dr. Aditya Singh S/o Shri Narendra Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 25 Years, R/o 72, Raghunathpuri, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Medical Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. National Medical Commission (Nmc), Through Its Secretary, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka Phase-I, New Delhi
3. Post Graduate Medical Education Board, Through Its Presidentn National Medical Commission, New Delhi.
4. The Principal, Sardar Patel Medical College (Spmc), Bikaner, Rajasthan.
5. The Principal And Controller, Sawai Man Singh (Sms) Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yash Joshi for Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG Mr. Pradhuman Singh Rathore HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order 20/08/2026
1. By way of instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing respondents to grant him an intra-State transfer from Sardar Patel Medical College, Bikaner to Sawai Man Singh Medical College, Jaipur, on the compassionate grounds pointed out by petitioner in the writ petition, in order to continue his MD Radio-Diagnosis course.
[2026:RJ-JP:33573] (2 of 2) [CW-9406/2026]
2. During the course of arguments, it has transpired that petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 23.03.2026 (Annexure-9) before respondents seeking intra-state transfer on the seat of MD Radio-Diagnosis course from Bikaner to Jaipur, however, same has not yet been considered and decided by the respondents.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for respondents submits that the representation submitted by petitioner shall be considered and decided within a period of sixty days.
4. In view of the above, without entering into the merits of the prayer made by petitioner, this Court deems it just and proper to grant an opportunity to the respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 23.03.2026 on its merits, and decide the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law. The representation may be decided by respondents, preferably within a period of 60 days.
5. In case the representation is decided against petitioner, it shall be open for him to file a fresh writ petition before the High Court, if so desires.
6. With the aforesaid observations and liberty, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin Sharma/ 4