[2026:RJ-JP:35043] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17334/2026 CNR: RJHC020842182026 | URN: CW / 36249U / 2026 Vineeta Kumari Meena D/o Amba Lal Meena, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Vpo Danalpur, Tehsil Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan- 322220 ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director General Of Polce, Police Headquarters, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. The Inspector General Of Polce, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 4. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, District Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendar Neel For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.F. Baig for RPSC Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, Additional Advocate General HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 01/09/2026 1. The brief facts of the case are that an advertisement dated 17.07.2025 came to be issued for the Sub-Inspector (SI)/Platoon Commander Combined Competitive Examination, 2025. It is submitted that as per the scheme of recruitment, approximately 20,000 candidates who qualified the written examination were called for the Physical Efficiency Test (hereinafter referred to as 'PET'), which was conducted across 8- [2026:RJ-JP:35043] (2 of 3) [CW-17334/2026] 12 different centres throughout the State of Rajasthan, with approximately 2,500 participants invited to each centre. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the result of the said PET. The core grievance of the petitioner is that she was unable to qualify the said physical test due to force majeure conditions and reasons entirely beyond her control. It is categorically alleged that heavy rain, wet tracks, accumulation of water, consequent injuries suffered during the test, and defective/erroneous measurements severely prejudiced the performance of the petitioner, for which she is seeking re- examination of the PET. 3. Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, Additional Advocate General has put in an appearance on behalf of the respondent- State. 4. Mr. M.F. Baig, Advocate, has marked his appearance on behalf of the respondent-RPSC. 5. Given the fact that the dispute essentially involves a determination of the factual matrix based on visual evidence and local conditions, a consensual and mediated approach was deemed appropriate by the learned counsel for the parties. 6. Accordingly, with the consent of the respective parties, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with the following mutually agreed directions:- (i) The petitioner is at liberty to submit an individual and detailed representation raising her specific grievances before the competent authority of the respondent-Commission within a period of five days from the date of uploading the present order on the web portal. [2026:RJ-JP:35043] (3 of 3) [CW-17334/2026] (ii) Upon receipt of such representation, the competent authority of the respondents shall consider and adjudicate the same on 09.09.2026 and 10.09.2026 at 11:00 AM. (iii) The competent authority of the respondent- Commission is directed to consider the factual and legal position and pass a well-reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. (iv) In the event the petitioner succeeds in her representation, the respondents shall permit her to undergo a re-examination for the said PET as per the convenient dates and schedule of the respondents. 7. For the sake of clarity and to ensure smooth compliance with the present order, Mr. Manoj Kumar, DIGP, Recruitment & Promotion Board, Jaipur, Rajasthan, is hereby appointed as the Nodal Officer. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 9. It is made clear that the disposal of the present writ petition shall cause no prejudice to either of the parties. 10. The stay application and pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J 26/ARTI SHARMA