Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 675/2025 CNR: RJHC010366842025 | URN: SAW / 1202U / 2025 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer - 305001 ----Appellant Versus
1. Durga Ram S/o Khema Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Naino Ki School, Siyalo Ki Dhani, Village Raichandpura, Post Bhojasar, Tehsil Baitu, District Barmer. (Roll Number 204099). 2. Praveen Panwar S/o Kishore Kumar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 18E225, Chopasani Housing Board, Backside Icici Bank, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur. (Roll Number 204097). 3. Sanjeev Kumar S/o Surendra Kumar, Aged About 37 Years, R/o V/p - Kumawas, Tehsil - Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu. (Roll Number - 203065). 4. Mukesh Kumar S/o Bhoop Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/ o House No. 1581, Sector - 20, Part - 2, Hsvp, Sirsa, District Sirsa, Hariyana. (Roll Number - 202612). 5. Sunil Kumar S/o Ram Narayan, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Gugurwalo Ka Mohalla, Chuwa, Degana, District Nagaur. (Roll Number - 200023). 6. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 7. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 8. Priyanshi Yadav (Roll No. 203768) D/o Shri Arvind Yadav, Resident Of House No. 107, Flat No. 103, Vishweshariya Nagar, Near Triveni Chouraha Ke Pass, Radha Swami Satsang Park Ke Samne, Jaipur - 3020005 (Mobile 9462941309)
9. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Kesharam Gurjar, Resident Of Village Post Badagaon, Tehsil Nandauti, District Karauli - 322216 (Mobile 8107428186). 10. Shri Abhijeet Purohit (Roll No. 204010) S/o Shri Dr. Raja Purohit, Resident Of Prayag Bhawan, Ladji Ke Bere Ke
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (2 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Samne, Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur (Mobile 9660134102). ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 551/2025 CNR: RJHC010292682025 | URN: SAW / 852U / 2025
1. Dr. Arvind S/o Shri Subhash Dhaka, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Plot No.3, Nursing Colony, Opp. High Court Colony, Ratanada, Jodhpur (Raj.)- 342001. 2. Dr. Yogesh Dokwal S/o Shri Kailash Sharma, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Near Clk Tower, Maru Street, Ward No.30, Sikar (Raj)- 332001. 3. Dr. Warsha Choudhary D/o Shri Ramesh Chand, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of 80 Feet Road, Ward No.20, Ganga Colony, Kherliganj, Alwar (Raj.)- 321606. 4. Dr. Kusum Meghwal D/o Shri Narayan Lal Meghwal, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of H.no.413, Singhatwara, Zawar Mines, Udaipur (Raj.)- 313901. 5. Dr.
Komal Chandel D/o Shri Lalchand Chandel, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of 247/30, Shiv Colony, Bai Ji Ki Kothi, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur (Raj.) - 302004. 6. Dr. Nikita D/o Shri Pritam Singh, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Jejusar, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)- 333707. 7. Dr. Avinash Atal S/o Shri Daya Ram Atal, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of F-17, Ambedkar Nagar, Alwar (Raj.)-
301001. 8. Dr. Priyanka Pahadiya D/o Shri Ram Pratap Pahadiya, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of 21-A, Chandra Nagar Gujar Ghati Amer Road, Jaipur (Raj.)- 302002. 9. Dr. Karan Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Darshan Singh Gurjar, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of V And P Paota, Tehsil Mahwa, District Dausa (Raj.)- 321612. 10. Dr. Yogesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Near Khandelwal Dharmshala, Bada Bazar, Baswa, Dausa (Raj.) -303327. 11. Dr. Harendra Singh Rajoriya S/o Shri Subhash Chand, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Vpo Mator, Tehsil
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (3 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Mundawar, District Alwar (Raj.)-301404. 12. Dr. Lakshmi Yadav D/o Shri Jai Prakash Yadav, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Majari Khurd, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar (Raj.) - 301703. 13. Dr. Shweta Sharma D/o Shri Radhey Shyam Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Shree Govind Nagar, Nadi Ka Phatak, Murlipura, Jaipur (Raj.) 302039. 14. Dr. Hemant Kumar Fagana S/o Shri Mahesh Chand, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Ajabpura, Tehsil Thanagaji, Alwar (Raj.)- 301024. 15. Dr. Mriganka Karwa D/o Shri Ram Gopal Karwa, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Village Karwo Ka Bas, Tehsil Mozamabad, District Dudu (Raj.) - 303604. 16. Dr. Karan Singh Bairwa S/o Shri Ramswroop Bairwa, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Village Aniyala, Post Malarna Chour, Tehsil Malarna Dungar, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.) - 322030. ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary.
3. Veterinary Council Of India, A-Wing, 2Nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikhaji Cama Place, New Delhi, Through Its Secretary. 4. Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences (Rajuvas), Vijay Bhawan, Near Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Circle, Bikaner, Through Its Registrar. 5. Post Gradeuate Institute Of Veterinary Education And Research (Pgiver), Nh-11, Agra Road, Jamdoli, Jaipur, Through Its Dean And Chairman. 6. Dr. Gajendra Singh S/o Shri Samandra Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Melawas, Post Musaliya, Tehsil Marwar Junction, District Pali (Raj.)-306103. 7. Dr. Kapil Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Norang Lal Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Nehru Nagar, Teshil
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (4 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Nohar, District Hanumgnarh (Raj.)
8. Dr. Nupur Pandey D/o Shri Om Prakash Pandey, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of C-181, Agrasen Nagar, Churu (Raj.)- 331001. 9. Dr. Dashrath Khemada S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Harsolao, Tehsil Merat City, District Nagaur (Raj.)- 331022. 10. Dr. Pushpendra Nanoma S/o Shri Manohar Lal Nanoma, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Talaiya, Tehsil Bicchhiwara, District Dungarpur (Raj.)- 314801. 11. Dr. Ankit Sharma S/o Shri Gopal Lal Sharma, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Behind Dr. Gotwal House, Amba Colony, Kuchaman City (Raj.)
12. Dr. Saurabh Sharma S/o Shri Hari Om Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Bank Of Baroda Street, Shanti Kunj Colony, Aklera, Jhalawar (Raj.)- 346033. 13. Dr. Meenu Todwal D/o Shri Narendra Kumar Todwal, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of P.no. 155, Arjun Nagar, Durgapura, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.) - 302018. 14. Dr. Mayank Sharma S/o Shri Vishwanath Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Gokul Bhawan, Santar Road, Dholpur (Raj.)- 328001. 15. Dr. Akshita Malav D/o Shri Raghunandan Malav, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of 19, Aanand Vihar, Ward No.02, Adarsh Nagar, Kota Road, Baran (Raj.)-325205. 16. Dr.
Koshal Kumar Meena S/o Shri Ganga Sahay Meena, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Village Mohanpura, Post Chudiyawas, Tehsil Nangal, District Dausa (Raj.)-
303505. 17. Dr. Mamta Gurjar D/o Shri Ramesh Chand Gurjar, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Pichani, Kotputli, Jaipur (Raj.). 18. Dr. Nikki Choudhary D/o Shri Sahi Ram Beniwal, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Village Pura Ki Dhani, Post Derwala, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)-333001. 19. Dr. Chandra Kanwar Chawara D/o Shri Lal Singh Chawara, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Gyan Sadan, Near Shri Ram Mandir, Old Industrial Area, Rani Bazar, District Bikaner (Raj.)- 334001. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (5 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 582/2025 CNR: RJHC010311682025 | URN: SAW / 889U / 2025
1. Dr. Pushpendra Chawla Khatik S/o Piru Lal Chawla Khatik, Aged About 29 Years, Vpo Daulatgarh, Tehsil Asind, District Bhilwara (Raj.). 2. Dr Kaishav Kumar Bairwa S/o Banwari Lal, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Meena Colony, Near Defence School, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.). ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary. 3. Veterinary Council Of India, A-Wing, 2Nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikhaji Cama Place, New Delhi, Through Its Secretary. 4. Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences (Rajuvas), Vijay Bhawan, Near Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Circle, Bikaner- Through Its Registrar. 5. College Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences, Bikaner Through Its Principal. 6. College Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences, Nawania, Vallabh Nagar, Udaipur Through Its Principal. 7. Post Graduate Institute Of Veterinary Education And Research (Pgiver), Nh- 11 Agra Rpad Ka, Dp O Jaipur Through Its Dean And Chairman. 8. Aravali Veterinary College, Nh-52, Bajor, District Sikar, Through Its Principal. 9. Dr Bal Ram Meena S/o Teeka Ram Meena, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Vpo Samleti, Tehsil Mahwa, District Dausa (Raj.). 10.
Dr Rahul Maurya S/o Suresh Kumar Maurya, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Village Jodhpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Respondents
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (6 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 585/2025 CNR: RJHC010305462025 | URN: SAW / 912U / 2025
1. Dr. Pooja Meena D/o Shri Ram Singh Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 86, Dev Nagar, Sanwali Road, Sikar (Raj.)
2. Dr. Meenu Sharma D/o Shri Mool Chand Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of 68, Sundar Nagar, Opp. Railway Station, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Dr. Brijbhushan Tiwari S/o Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Kalyanpura, Sapotra, District Karoli (Raj.). 4. Dr. Shailja D/o Sri Ravindra Kumar Singh, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Central Colony, Road No. 9, Vki, Jaipur (Raj.). 5. Dr. Tripti Bhatia D/o Shri Purushottam Bhatia, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Indra Colony, Bikaner (Raj.). 6. Dr. Savitree Sihag D/o Shri Tolaram Siha, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of H.no.34, Gali No. 8, Ambedkar Colony, Old Shiv Bari Road, Bikaner (Raj.). 7. Dr. Saroj Katara D/o Sri Harish Chandra Katara, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Simalwara, District Dungarpur (Raj.). ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary. 3. Veterinary Council Of India, Add - A-Wing, 2Nd Floor, August Krantibhawan, Bhikhajicama Place, New Delhi, Through Its Secretary
4. Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences (Rajuvas), Vijay Bhawan, Near Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Circle, Bikaner- Through Its Registrar. 5. College Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences, Bikaner Through Its Principal. 6. Dr. Phool Kanwar D/o Shri Jamat Singh Sodha, Aged
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (7 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] About 31 Years, Resident Of Nmear Govt. Sr. Sec. School Pugal District Bikaner (Raj.). 7. Dr. Pooja Gurjar D/o Shri Rajdhar Singh, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of A-64, Shiv Vihar Colony, Khatipura, Jaipur (Raj.). 8. Dr.
Chandra Prakash S/o Shri Ramlal, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Village Gangapura, Post Khotiya, Tehsil Ramgarh Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.). 9. Dr. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Ramhet Meena, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Jawali Ka Badh, Baswa, Dausa (Raj.). 10. Dr. Chain Singh S/o Shri Anik Singh, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Bharatpur (Raj.). 11. Dr. Kirtika Panwar D/o Shri Prakash Chand Panwar, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Ward No.4, Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj.). 12. Dr. Yatindra Singh Sengar S/o Shri Ghanshyam Singh Sengar, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Sengar Sadan, Shubh Laxmi Nagar, Gangapur City (Raj.). 13. Dr. Vishvendra Meena S/o Shri Ramavtar Meena, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of 01, Bagh Ka Pura, Wagla Meena, Karauli (Raj.). 14. Dr. Satveer Mokharia S/o Shri Dayanand Mokharia, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Dhayalo Ka Bas, Kari Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu (Raj.). 15. Dr. Darpan Meena S/o Shri Basanti Lal, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Gatod, Sarada, Udaipur (Raj.). ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 589/2025 CNR: RJHC010311572025 | URN: SAW / 939U / 2025
1. Dr. Tarachand Khatik S/o Shri Ramswaroop Khatik, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Borada, Sarwar, District Ajmer (Raj.). 2. Dr Sunita Kanwar D/o Shri Anop Singh Rathore, Aged About 31 Years, Pabusar, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj.). 3. Dr Vimala Choudhary D/o Shri Ram Lal Choudhary, Aged About 28 Years, Genaniyon Ka Tala, Khume Ki Beri, Dudu,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (8 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Dorimanna (Raj.). 4. Dr Madhu Meena D/o Shri Tejram Meena, Aged About 31 Years, Katkad, Hindaun City, Karauli. ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary. 3. Veterinary Council Of India, A Wing, 2Nd Floor, August Krantibhawan, Bhikhajicama Place, New Delhi, Through Its Secretary. 4. Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences (Rajuvas) Vijay Bhawan, Near Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Circle, Bikaner- Through Its Registrar. 5.
College Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences, Nawania, Vallabh Nagar, Udaipur, Through Its Principal. 6. Aravali Veterinary College, Nh-52, Bajor, District Sikar- Through Its Principal. 7. Dr Jayesh Dhoral S/o Shri Ridmal Ram, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Karola, Tehsil Sanchore, District Sanchore (Raj.). 8. Dr Bhavna Bhardwaj D/o Shri Mahendra Singh, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Punjabi Mohalla, New Road, Deeg, Bharatpur (Raj.). 9. Dr Shailendra Singh Bansiwal S/o Shri Bhoor Singh, Resident Of Milkipura, Dhindhora, Suroth, District Karauli (Raj.). 10. Dr Gajendra Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Dharm Singh, Resident Of Neotha, Tehsil Nadbai,
11. Dr Gourav Sisodiya S/o Shri Devnarayan Sisodiya, Resident Of Jhuntha, Raipur, Pali (Raj.). 12. Dr Vikas Meena S/o Shri Mohan Lal Meena, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village Banjariya, Tehsil And Post, Kherwara, Udaiur (Raj.). 13. Dr Manak Ram S/o Shri Bhundaram, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Meghwalo Ka Bas, Bilawas, Sojat City,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (9 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Karauli (Raj.). 14. Dr Ramesh Verma S/o Shri Sitaram Verma, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of C-17, Dadichi Nagar, Road No.5, Vki, Jaipur (Raj.). 15. Dr Priyanka Masar D/o Shri Jeetmal Masar, Resident Of V And P Panasichooti, Tehsi,l Garhi, District Banswara (Raj.). 16. Dr Ritika Vyas D/o Shri Satish Prakash Sharma, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of 01, Shastri Nagar, Chittorgarh (Raj.). 17. Dr Aakansha Mathur D/o Shri Dharmendra Kumar Mathur, Resident Of 48, Vishwakarma Nagar, 80 Fee Link Road, Near Bajrang Nagar, Kota (Raj.).,
18. Dr Suryaprakash Chouhan S/o Shri Baldev Raj Chouhan, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Ganesh Chowk, Sojat City, Pali (Raj.). ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 610/2025 CNR: RJHC010311602025 | URN: SAW / 981U / 2025
1. Dr. Kamlesh S/o Shri Narayan Ram, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of 190, Nakoda Nagar, Ward No. 3, District Jodhpur (Raj.). 2.
Vijendra Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Rampal Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Kalyanpura, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Mahipal Singh Jaitawat S/o Shri Devi Singh, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Village Kelwad, Tehsil Sojat, District Pali (Raj.). 4. Mohammad Ibrahim S/o Shri Nabab Khan, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Cadva Urf Jhadwa, Post Gagriya, Tehsil Ramsar, District Barmer (Raj.). ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (10 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
3. Veterinary Council Of India, A-Wing, 2Nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikhaji Lama Place, New Delhi, Through Its Secretary. 4. Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences (Rajuvas), Vijay Bhawan, Near Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Circle, Bikaner- Through Its Registrar. 5. Kamdhenu University, B-1 Wing, 4Th Floor, Block 1, Karmayogibhawan, Sector 10 A, Sector 10, Gandhinagar, Gujarat Through Its Registrar
6. Dileep Singh S/o Shri Hindu Singh, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village Ketukalan, Tehsil, Sekhala, District Jodhpur (Raj.). 7. Dilkush Meena, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Near Govt. Secondary School, Koondia, District Baran (Raj.). 8. Bhawana Kanwar D/o Shri Samder Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village-Melawas, Tehsil Marwar Junction, District Pall (Raj.). 9. Kamlesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Suresh Chand, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of 3-G-53, Mahaveer Nagar Ext. District Kota (Raj.). 10. Nanaji Deshmukh Veterinary Science University, Near Empire Square, South Civil Lines, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh Through Its Registrar. ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 611/2025 CNR: RJHC010304502025 | URN: SAW / 982U / 2025 Dr. Dalu Ram Meena S/o Shri Bhori Lal Meena, Aged About 30 Years, Village Birajpura, Post Todabhata, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Appellant Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary. 3. Veterinary Council Of India, A Wing, 2Nd Floor, August Krantibhawan, Bhikhajicama Place, New Delhi, Through
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (11 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Its Secretary. 4.
Nanaji Deshmukh Veterinary Science University, Near Empire Square, South Civil Lines, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh Through Its Registrar. 5. Kamdhenu University, B-1 Wing, 4Th Floor, Block 1 Karmyogi Bhawan, Sector 10A, Sector 10, Gandhinagar, Gujara Through Its Registrar. 6. Dr Rohit Sankhla S/o Shri Ch Inna Ram Sankhla, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 123, Shanti Priya Nagar Extension, Near Thar Dry Port, District Jodhpur (Raj.). 7. Dr Mukesh Kumar S/o Shri Purakh Singh, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Vpo Kaludi, Tehsil, Pachpadra, District Barmer (Raj.). 8. Sunita Rolania D/o Shri Mohan Lal, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Ward No.14, Gidawala, Shrimadhopur, District Sikar (Raj.). ----Respondents CONNECTED WITH (AT JAIPUR BENCH) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 126/2025 CNR: RJHC020156612025 | URN: SAW / 446U / 2025 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer-305001 ----Appellant Versus
1. Shalendra Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Mool Chand Yadav S/o Mool Chand Yadav, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Vpo Banar, Tehsil And District Kotputli, District Jaipur. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. Priyarishi Yadav (Roll No. 203768), D/o Shri Arvind Yadav, Resident House No. 107, Flat No. 103, Vishweshariya Nagar, Near Triveni Chouraha Ke Pass,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (12 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Radha Swami Satsarig Park Ke Samne, Jaipur - 302005
5. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Keshram Gurjar, Resident Of Village Post Badagaon, Tehsil Nandauti, District Karauli- 322216
6. Shri Abhijeet Purohit (Roll No. 204010) S/o Shri Dr. Raja Purohit, Resident Of Prayag Bhawan, Ladji Ke Bere Ke Samne, Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 138/2025 CNR: RJHC020176002025 | URN: SAW / 468U / 2025
1. Gireesh Joshi S/o Shri Jitendra Kumar Joshi, R/o Plot No. 80, Nalanda Vihar, Maharani Farm, Dugapura, Jaipur District Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Mrinal Verma S/o Sh.
Yogeshwar, Registration No- Rsvc/ 5798/2020, Address-I-E-22, New Housing Board, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madangang- Kisshangarh, District- Ajmer, (Raj.) Pin-305801 ----Appellants Versus
1. Amar Singh Saini S/o Shri Babu Lal Saini, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 700, Dhani Sheraala, Tehsil Khetri, Village Babai, District Jhujhunu. 2. Kapil Kumar Godara S/o Shri Nand Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Village And Post Dhandhan, Sikar. 3. Hitesh Kumar S/o Shri Tara Chand Poonia, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Vpo Nua, Poonia Market Nua, District Jhunjhunu. 4. Raj Kumar Saran S/o Shri Sukha Ram Saran, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Daudsar, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu. 5. Kamal Kishore Jakhar S/o Shri Manga Ram Jakhar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 07, Hanuman Nagar, Khivtana, Post Dotina, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur. 6. Dharmveer Singh S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Badki Dhani, Post And Tehsil Gudagaudji, District Jhunjhunu. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (13 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
7. Vikas Kumar S/o Shri Shishupal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Kaseru, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu. 8. Pooja Nimber D/o Shri Sitaram Nimber, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 964, Sankhwas, Po Sankhwas, District Nagaur- 341028 Nagaur. 9. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 10. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 11. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer. 12. Tara Chand S/o Sh. Narayan Ram, Dob-11.06.1993 Registration No.-Rsvc/5751,2020, Address- Village- Bajiyasar, Post- Kitalsar, Tehsil- Degana, District- Nagaur, (Rajasthan) Pin- 341503. 13. Santosh D/o Sh. Ganesh Ram, Dob- 01.07.1994 Registration No.- Rsvc/5730/2020, Address- Village- Khokhara, Tehsil- Sojat, District- Pali, (Rajasthan) Pin-
306306. 14. Sachin Patidar S/o Sh. Manoj Kumar Patidar, Dob- 15.11.1995 Registration No.- Rsvc/5818/2021, Address- Mukam, Post- Dovra, Tehsil- Dungarpur, District- Dungarpur (Rajasthan) Pin-314036
15. Himanshu Saini D/o Sh. Anand Saini, Dob- 07.05.1995 Registration No.- Rsvc/5692/2020/, Address- Near Goinka School, Ward No. 59. Tehsil- Churu, District- Churu (Rajasthan) Pin-331001. 16. Jayanu Parmar D/o Sh.
Rajesh Parmar, Dob-09.05.1996 Registration No.- Rsvc/5693/2020, Address-Vpo- Mahuwal Post- Sarera, Tehsil- Kherwara, District- Udaipur (Rajasthan) Pin-313804. ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 173/2025 CNR: RJHC020186362025 | URN: SAW / 520U / 2025
1. Sitaram S/o Bhagirath, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Surajansar, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (14 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Pincode-335804
2. Kalpana D/o Ramji Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Vpo Parlika, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Pincode-335504 ----Appellants Versus
1. Shalendra Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Mool Chand Yadav, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Vpo Banar, Tehsil And District Kotputli, District Jaipur. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 4. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer
5. Priyanshi Yadav (Roll No. 203768) D/o Shri Arvind Yadav, Resident House No. 107, Flat No. 103, Vishweshariya Nagar, Near Triveni Chouraha Ke Pass, Radha Swami Satsang Park Ke Samne, Jaipur- 302005
6. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Keshram Gurjar, R/o Village And Post Badagaon, Tehsil Nandauti, District Karauli- 322216
7. Shri Abhijeet Purohit (Roll No. 204010) S/o Shri Dr. Raja Purohit, R/o Prayag Bhawan, Ladji Ke Bere Ke Samne, Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 174/2025 CNR: RJHC020195232025 | URN: SAW / 521U / 2025
1. Santosh D/o Shri Ganesh Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/ o Village Khokhara Tehsil Sojat District Pali, Rajasthan. 2. Sachin Patidar S/o Shri Manoj Kumar Patidar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mukam, Post Dovra, Tehsil Dungarpur, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan. ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (15 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer. 4. Tarachand S/o Shri Narayan Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Bajiyasar, Post Kitalsar, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
5. Mrinal Verma S/o Shri Yogeshwar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o I-E-22, New Housing Road, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madanganj, Kisshangarh, District Ajmer, Rajasthan. 6. Himanshu Saini S/o Shri Anand Saini, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Near Goinka School, Ward No. 59, Tehsil Churu, District Churu, Rajasthan. 7. Jayanu Parmar D/o Shri Rajesh Parmar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vpo Mahuwal, Post Sarera, Tehsil Kherwara, District Udaipur, Rajasthan. 8. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Govind Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Olagarh, Kheri, Radan Sikar Rajasthan, Roll No. 203384. 9. Kiran Kumari Khichar C/o Mukesh Haritwal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No.9 Haritwalo Ki Dhani, Dheengpur, Sikar Rajasthan, Roll No. 203573. 10. Anuj Kumar S/o Shri Ram Niwas, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Dheengi Churu, Dhingi Rajasthan, Roll No. 201076. 11. Amit Kumar Lavania S/o Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o C.76, Rajendra Prasad Nagar, Badar Vas, Ward No.19, Jaipur Rajasthan, Roll No.203410
12. Yash Bhargava S/o Shri Dr. Sandeep Bhargava, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 1262/3, A- Deeg Gali, Kachchi Sadak, Mathura, Uttar-Pradesh, Roll No. 202687. 13. Rahul Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Satish Kumar Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Sinchai Vibhag Ke Saamne, Kamala Colony, Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, Roll No.200605. 14. Puneet Jain S/o Shri Paras Kumar Jain, Aged About 31 Years, R/o C-79-80, Malviya Nagar, Alwar, Rajasthan, Roll No.203200. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (16 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
15. Abhishek Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Manoj Kumar Pandey, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No.4, Shakti Nagar Purani, Abadi, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, Roll No.201337. 16. Ashok Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Khuma Ram Choudhary, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Gang Gong Jalor, Rajasthan, Roll No.204157. 17. Arvind Beniwal S/o Shri Amrit Singh Beniwal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Mandawara, Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan, Roll No.200631. 18. Pawan Kumar Katewa S/o Shri Chand Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Alipur, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No.203053. 19. Amit Kumar S/o Shri Ashok Kumar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ondela Road, Dholpur, Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, Roll No.200600. 20.
Manvendra Singh S/o Bhawan Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Belara, Kalan, Bharatpur Rajasthan, Roll No.200504. 21. Karamveer Choudhary S/o Shri Ramniwas Choudhary, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Durana, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No.203036. 22. Pankaj Beniwal S/o Shri Nemichand Beniwal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Kua Stand, Raghunathpura, Derwala, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No.202795. 23. Kartika Nagar D/o Amar Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o B-7, Road No.1, Krishana Nagar, Police Line, Nayapura, Kota Rajasthan, Roll No.204532. 24. Rajveer Singh S/o Shri Hari Narayan Jat, R/o 117, Gandhi Chowk, Gram Bobadi The- Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur, Vtc- Bobari, Sub District Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No.203320. 25. Manaswini Sharma D/o Raghuveer Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o N-H, The Chomu Kalu Ka Bas Colony, Govindgarh, Jaipur Rajasthan, Roll No.203369. 26. Liladhar S/o Lal Chand, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 26, Gali No.3, Surya Nagar, Hanumangarh, Town 8 Ssw, Kohlan, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan, Roll No.201290. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (17 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
27. Anurag S/o Shri Ramawtar, Aged About 34 Years, Nawalgarh Road, Kisan Colony, Sikar, Rajasthan, Roll No.203622. 28. Asif Mohamad S/o Asfak Mohamad, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 2-C-56, Housing Board Senthi, Chittaurgarh, Rajasthan, Roll No.204552. 29. Vinod Yadav S/o Shri Shiv Ram Yadav, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ward No-19, Bhomaka Ki Dhani, Chomu, Tripolia Chomu, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No.203297. 30. Soniya Damor C/o Yatish Bamniya, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Malwasa, Post Sangod, District Banswara, Rajasthan , Roll No.205059. 31. Komal Khichar C/o Neeraj Periwal, Aged About 31 Years, R/o A-206, Vatika Enclave, Jaipur Road, Bikaner, Po- Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan, Roll No.202872. 32. Ayush Pareek C/o Naresh Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Gully No. 5, Near Vande Matram Chowk, Radhakishanpura, Vtc- Radha Kishanpura (Rural) Po Sikar, Sub District Sikar, Rajasthan , Roll No.203680. 33. Sunita Kumari W/o Vishal Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ghoriwara Kalan, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No.
203070. 34.
Rohit Kumar Tiwari S/o Ramavatar Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Sabdawali, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa, Rajasthan , Roll No. 203411 ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 175/2025 CNR: RJHC020195202025 | URN: SAW / 522U / 2025
1. Mukani Kumari D/o Shankar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o House No. 236, Bhawan Desar, District Churu, Rajasthan-331802. 2. Ankit Kumar S/o Parmeshwar Lal Jangir, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 1, Jiwa Ka Bas, Kharkhari, Post Office Kharkhari, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan-333011. ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Secretariat, Jaipur. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (18 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
2. Rajasthan Public Services Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer. 3. Ganendra Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 243-244, Madhav Nagar, Opp. Durgapura Railway Station, Durgapura Jaipur, Rajasthan. 4. Himanshu Raj Singh Chunwawat S/o Shri Mahipal Singh Chundawat, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Gara Ekling Ji, Tehsil Aspur, Gram Panchayat Khera Aspur, Dungarpur. ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 176/2025 CNR: RJHC020195302025 | URN: SAW / 523U / 2025
1. Mukani Kumari D/o Shankar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o House No. 236, Bhawan Desar, District Churu, Rajasthan - 331802. 2. Ankit Kumar S/o Parmeshwar Lal Jangir, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 1, Jiwa Ka Bas, Kharkhari, Post Office Kharkhari, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan -
333011. ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Anil Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer. 4. Priyanshi Yadav (Roll No. 203768) D/o Shri Arvind Yadav, Resident House No. 107, Flat No. 103, Vishweshariya Nagar, Near Triveni Chouraha Ke Pass, Radha Swami Satsang Park Ke Samne, Jaipur- 302005. 5. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Keshram Gurjar, R/o Village And Post Badagaon, Tehsil Nandauti, District Karauli- 322216
6.
Shri Abhijeet Purohit (Roll No. 204010) S/o Shri D. Raja Purohit, R/o Prayag Bhawan, Ladji Ke Bere Ke Samne, Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur. 7. Shalendra Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Mool Hand Yadav, Aged
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (19 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] About 36 Years, R/o Vpo Banar, Tehsil And District Kotputli, District Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 193/2025 CNR: RJHC020186072025 | URN: SAW / 542U / 2025
1. Himanshu Saini S/o Shri Anand Saini, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Near Goinka School, Ward No. 59, Tehsil Churu, District Churu, Rajasthan. 2. Jayanu Parmar Daughter Of Shri Rajesh Parmar, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Vpo Mahuwal, Post Sarera, Tehsil Kherwara, District Udaipur, Rajasthan. ----Appellants Versus
1. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Govind Singh, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Olagarh, Kheri, Radan Sikar, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203384. 2. Kiran Kumari Khichar C/o Mukesh Haritwal, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 9, Haritwalo Ki Dhani, Dheengpur, Sikar, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203573. 3. Anju Kumar Son Of Shri Ram Niwas, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Dheengi Churu, Dhingi Rajasthan, Roll No. 201076
4. Amit Kumar Lavania Son Of Shri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of C.76, Rajendra Prasad Nagar, Badar Vas, Ward No. 19, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203410
5. Yash Bhargava Son Of Shri Dr. Sandeep Bhargava, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of 1262/3, A- Deeg Gali, Kachchi Sadak, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, Roll No. 202687
6. Rahul Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Satish Kumar Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Sinchai Vibhag Ke Saamne, Kamala Colony, Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 200605
7. Puneet Jain Son Of Shri Paras Kumar Jain, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of C-79-80, Malviya Nagar, Alwar, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203200
8. Abhishek Kumar Pandey Son Of Shri Manoj Kumar Pandey, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 4,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (20 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Shakti Nagar, Purani Abadi, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, Roll No. 201337
9.
Ashok Kumar Choudhary Son Of Shri Khuma Ram Choudhary, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Gang Gong Jalor, Rajasthan, Roll No. 204157
10. Arvind Beniwal Son Of Shri Amrit Singh Beniwal, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Mandawara, Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan, Roll No. 200631
11. Pawan Kumar Katewa Son Of Shri Chand Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Alipur, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203053
12. Amit Kumar Son Of Shri Ashok Kumar, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Ondela Road, Dholpur, Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 200600
13. Manvendra Singh Son Of Shri Bhawan Singh, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Belara, Kalan, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 200504. 14. Karamveer Choudhary Son Of Shri Ramniwas Choudhary, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Durana, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203036
15. Pankaj Beniwal Son Of Shri Nemichand Beniwal, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Village Kua Stand, Raghunathpura, Derwala, Jhunjhunu, Roll No. 202795
16. Kartika Nagar Daughter Of Shri Amar Lal, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of B-7, Road No. 1, Krishna Nagar, Police Line, Nayapura, Kota, Rajasthan, Roll No. 204532
17. Rajveer Singh Son Of Shri Hari Narayan Jat, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of 117, Gandhi Chowk, Gram Bobadi The-Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur, Vtc-Bobari, Sub District Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203320
18. Manaswini Sharma Daughter Of Shri Raghuveer Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of N-H, The Chomu Kalu Ka Bas Colony, Govindgarh, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203369
19. Liladhar Son Of Shri Lal Chand, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 26, Gali No. 3, Surya Nagar, Hanumangarh, Town 8Ssw, Kohlan, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan, Roll No. 201290
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (21 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
20. Anurag Son Of Shri Ramawtar, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Nawalgarh Road, Kisan Colony, Sikar, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203622
21. Asif Mohammad Son Of Shri Asfak Mohamad, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of 2-C-56, Housing Board Senthi, Chittaurgarh, Rajasthan, Roll No. 204552
22.
Vinod Yadav Son Of Shri Shiv Ram Yadav, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 19, Bhomaka Ki Dhani, Chomu, Tripolia Chomu, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203297
23. Soniya Damor C/o Shri Yatish Bamniya, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Village Malwasa, Post Sangod, District Banswara, Rajasthan, Roll No. 205059
24. Komal Khichar Son Of Shri Neeraj Periwal, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of A-206, Vatika Enclave, Jaipur Road, Bikaner, Po Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan, Roll No. 202872
25. Ayush Pareek Care Of Shri Naresh Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Gully No. 5, Near Vande Matram Chowk, Radhakishanpura, Vtc- Radha Kishanpura (Rural) Po Sikar, Sub District Sikar, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203680
26. Sunita Kumari Wife Of Shri Vishal Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Ghoriwara Kalan, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203070
27. Rohit Kumar Tiwari Son Of Shri Ramavatar Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Sabdawali, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa, Rajathan, Roll No. 203411. 28. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
29. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
30. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer. 31. Tarachand Son Of Shri Nrayan Ram, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Village Bajiyasar, Post Kitalsar, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur, Rajasthan. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (22 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
32. Santosh Daughter Of Shri Ganesh Ram, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Khokhara, Tehsil Sojat, District Pali, Rajasthan. 33. Mrinal Verma Son Of Shri Yogeshwar, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of I-E-22, New Housing Road, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madanganj, Kisshangarh, District Ajmer, Rajasthan. 34. Sachin Patidar Son Of Shri Manoj Kumar Patidar, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Mukam Post Dovra, Tehsil Dungarpur, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 194/2025 CNR: RJHC020195282025 | URN: SAW / 543U / 2025
1. Santosh D/o Sh.
Ganesh Ram, Aged About 30 Years, Registration No.- Rsvc/5730/2020, Address- Village- Khokhara, Tehsil-Sojat, District- Pali, (Rajasthan) Pin-
306306. 2. Sachin Patidar S/o Sh. Manoj Kumar Patidar, Registration No.-Rsvc/5818/2021, Address- Mukam, Post-Dovra, Tehsil-Dungarpur, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan) Pin- 314036. ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer. 4. Tara Chand S/o Sh. Narayan Ram, Registration No.- Rsvc/5751/2020, Address- Village- Bajiyasar, Post- Kitalsar, Tehsil- Degana, District- Nagaur, (Rajasthan) Pin-341503
5. Mrinal Verma S/o Sh. Yogeshwar, Registration No.- Rsvc/ 5798/2020, Address - I-E-22, New Housing Board, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madangang- Kisshangarh, District- Ajmer, (Rajasthan) Pin-305801
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (23 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
6. Himanshu Saini D/o Sh. Anand Saini, Registration No.- Rsvc/5692/2020, Address- Near Goinka School, Ward No. 59, Tehsil- Churu, District - Churu (Rajasthan) Pin- 331001
7. Jayanu Parmar D/o Sh. Rajesh Parmar, Registration No.- Rsvc/5693/2020, Address- Vpo - Mahuwal, Post- Sarera, Tehsil- Kherwara, District- Udaipur (Rajasthan) Pin- 313804
8. Gireesh Joshi S/o Shri Jitendra Kumar Joshi, R/o Plot No. 80, Nalanda Vihar, Maharani Farm, Dugapura, Jaipur District Jaipur (Raj.)
9. Amar Singh Saini S/o Shri Babu Lal Saini, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 700, Dhani Sheraala, Tehsil Khetri, Village Babai, District Jhujhunu
10. Kapil Kumar Godara S/o Shri Nand Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Village And Post Dhandhan, Sikar
11. Hitesh Kumar S/o Shri Tara Chand Poonia, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Vpo Nua, Poonia Market Nua, District Jhunjhunu
12. Raj Kumar Saran S/o Shri Sukha Ram Saran, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Daudsar, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu
13. Kamal Kishore Jakhar S/o Shri Manga Ram Jakhar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 07, Hanuman Nagar, Khivtana, Post Dotina, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur
14. Dharmveer Singh S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Badki Dhani, Post And Tehsil Gudagaudji, District Jhunjhunu
15.
Vikas Kumar S/o Shri Shishupal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Kaseru, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu
16. Pooja Nimber D/o Shri Sitaram Nimber, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 964, Sankhwas, Po Sankhwas, District Nagaur-341028 Nagaur ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 239/2025 CNR: RJHC020223132025 | URN: SAW / 708U / 2025
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (24 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Tara Chand S/o Sh. Narayan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Bajiyasar, Post- Kitalsar, Tehsil-Degana, District Nagaur (Rajasthan) Pincode - 341503 ----Appellant Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer
4. Santosh D/o Sh. Ganesh Ram, Dob - 01.07.1994 Registration No. - Rsvc/5730/2020, Address- Village- Khokhara, Tehsil- Sojat, District- Pali, (Rajasthan) Pin- 306306
5. Mrinal Verma S/o Sh. Yogeshwar, D.o.b. -05.03.1996 Registration No.- Rsvc/5798/2020, Address - I-E-22, New Housing Board, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madangang- Kisshangarh, District- Ajmer, (Rajasthan) Pin-305801
6. Sachin Patidar S/o Sh. Manoj Kumar Patidar, D.o.b.- 15.11.1995 Registration No.- Rsvc/5818/2021, Address- Mukam, Post- Dovra, Tehsil- Dungarpur, District.- Dungarpur (Rajasthan) Pin- 314036
7. Himanshu Saini D/o Sh. Anand Saini, D.o.b. - 07.05.1995 Registration No.- Rsvc/5692/2020, Address- Neargoinka School, Ward No. 59, Tehsil- Churu, District - Churu (Rajasthan) Pin- 331001
8. Jayanu Parmar D/o Sh. Rajesh Parmar, D.o.b. - 09.05.1996 Registration No.- Rsvc/5693/2020, Address- Vpo- Mahuwal, Post- Sarera, Tehsil- Kherwara, District- Udaipur (Rajasthan) Pin- 313804
9. Giresh Joshi S/o Shri Jitendra Kumar Joshi, R/o Plot No. 80, Nalanda Vihar, Maharani Farm, Dugapura, Jaipur District Jaipur (Raj. 10. Amar Singh Saini S/o Shri Babu Lal Saini, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 700, Dhani Sheraala, Tehsil Khetri, Village
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (25 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Babai, District Jhujhunu
11. Kapil Kumar Godara S/o Shri Nand Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 10,villageandpostdhandhan, Sikar
12. Hitesh Kumars/oshri Tarachandpoonia, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Vpo Nua, Poonia Market Nua, District Jhunjhunu
13.
Raj Kumar Saran S/o Shri Sukha Ram Saran, Aged About
37
Years, R/ovillageandpostdaudsar,tehsilratangarh, District Churu
14. Kamal Kishore Jakhar S/o Shri Manga Ram Jakhar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 07, Hanuman Nagar, Khivtana, Post Dotina, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur
15. Dharmveer Singh S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Badki Dhani, Post And Tehsil Gudagaudji, District Jhunjhunu
16. Vikas Kumar S/o Shri Shishupal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Kaseru, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu
17. Pooja Nimber D/o Shri Sitaram Nimber, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 964, Sankhwas, Po Sankhwas, District Nagaur-341028 Nagaur ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 288/2025 CNR: RJHC020267142025 | URN: SAW / 804U / 2025 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer- 305001 ----Appellant Versus
1. Dr. Omprakash Nagar S/o Shri Daulat Ram Nagar, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Village Rajpura, Tehsil Sunel, Post Salotiya, District Jhalawar
2. Dr. Mahesh Nehara S/o Shri Sita Ram Kumawat, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of 491, Rajvi Vihar, Heerapura, Ajmer Road, Jaipur
3. Narendra Kumar Kumawat S/o Shri Ram Narayan Rajora, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Pipli Wali Dhani, Kalwar Road, Hingonia, Jaipur
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (26 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
5. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
6. Priyanshi Yadav (Roll No. 203768) D/o Shri Arvind Yadav, Resident House No. 107, Flat No. 103, Vishweshariya Nagar, Near Triveni Chouraha Ke Pass, Radha Swami Satsang Park Ke Samne, Jaipur- 302005
7. Virendra Singh S/o Shri Keshram Gurjar, Resident Of Village Post Badagaon, Tehsil Nandauti, District Karauli- 322216
8. Shri Abhijeet Purohit (Roll No. 204010) S/o Shri Dr. Raja Purohit, Resident Of Prayag Bhawan, Ladji Ke Bere Ke Samne, Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 289/2025 CNR: RJHC020267232025 | URN: SAW / 812U / 2025 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer - 305001 ----Appellant Versus
1.
Virendra Singh S/o Shri Govind Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Olagarh, Kheri, Radan Sikar Rajasthan, Roll No. 203384
2. Kiran Kumari Khichar C/o Mukesh Haritwal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No.9 Haritwalo Ki Dhani, Dheengpur, Sikar Rajasthan, Roll No. 203573. 3. Anuj Kumar S/o Shri Ram Niwas, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Dheengi Churu, Dhingi Rajasthan, Roll No. 201076. 4. Amit Kumar Lavania S/o Jagdish Prasad Sharma, R/o C.76, Rajendra Prasad Nagar, Badar Vas, Ward No.19, Jaipur Rajasthan, Roll No.203410. 5. Yash Bhargava S/o Shri Dr. Sandeep Bhargava, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 1262/3, A- Deeg Gali, Kachchi Sadak, Mathura, Uttar-Pradesh, Roll No. 202687
6. Rahul Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Satish Kumar Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Sinchai Vibhag Ke Saamne,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (27 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Kamala Colony, Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, Roll No.200605
7. Puneet Jain S/o Shri Paras Kumar Jain, Aged About 31 Years, R/o C-79-80, Malviya Nagar, Alwar, Rajasthan, Roll No.203200
8. Abhishek Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Manoj Kumar Pandey, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No.4, Shakti Nagar Purani, Abadi, Ganganagar Rajasthan, Roll No.201337
9. Ashok Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Khuma Ram Choudhary, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Gang Gong Jalor, Rajasthan, Roll No. 204157
10. Arvind Beniwal S/o Shri Amrit Singh Beniwal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Mandawara, Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan, Roll No.200631
11. Pawan Kumar Katewa S/o Shri Chand Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Of Alipur, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203053
12. Amit Kumar S/o Shri Ashok Kumar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ondela Road, Dholpur, Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, Roll No.200600
13. Manvendra Singh S/o Bhawan Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Belara, Kalan, Bharatpur Rajasthan, Roll No. 200504
14. Karamveer Choudhary S/o Shri Ramniwas Choudhary, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Durana, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No.203036
15. Pankaj Beniwal S/o Shri Nemichand Beniwal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Kua Stand, Raghunathpura, Derwala, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No.202795
16.
Kartika Nagar D/o Amar Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o B-7, Road No.1, Krishana Nagar, Police Line, Nayapura, Kota Rajasthan, Roll No. 204532
17. Rajveer Singh S/o Shri Hari Narayan Jat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 117, Gandhi Chowk, Gram Bobadi The- Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur, Vtc- Bobari, Sub District Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No.203320
18. Manaswini Sharma D/o Raghuveer Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o N-H, The Chomu Kalu Ka Bas Colony,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (28 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Govindgarh, Jaipur Rajasthan, Roll No. 203369
19. Liladhar S/o Lal Chand, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 26, Gali No.3, Surya Nagar, Hanumangarh, Town 8 Ssw, Kohlan, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan, Roll No.201290
20. Anurag S/o Shri Ramawtar, Aged About 34 Years, Nawalgarh Road, Kisan Colony, Sikar, Rajasthan, Roll No.203622
21. Asif Mohamad S/o Asfak Mohamad, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 2-C-56, Housing Board Senthi, Chittarugarh, Rajasthan, Roll No.204552
22. Vinod Yadav S/o Shri Shiv Ram Yadav, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ward No-19, Bhomaka Ki Dhani, Chomu, Tripolia Chomu, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Roll No.203297
23. Soniya Damor C/o Yatish Bamniya, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Malwasa, Post Sangod, District Banswara, Rajasthan, Roll No.205059
24. Komal Khichar C/o Neeraj Periwal, Aged About 31 Years, R/o A-206, Vatika Enclave, Jaipur Road, Bikaner, Po- Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan, Roll No.202872
25. Ayush Pareek C/o Naresh Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Gully No. 5, Near Vande Matram Chowk, Radhakishanpura, Vtc- Radha Kishanpura (Rural) Po Sikar, Sub District Sikar, Rajasthan Roll No.203680
26. Sunita Kumari W/o Vishal Kumar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ghoriwara Kalan, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203070
27. Rohit Kumar Tiwari S/o Ramavatar Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Sabdawali, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa, Rajasthan, Roll No. 203411
28. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) Government
29. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
30.
Tarachand S/o Shri Narayan Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Bajiyasar, Post Kitalsar, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur, Rajasthan. 31. Santosh D/o Shri Ganesh Ram, Aged About 30 Years,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (29 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] R/o Village Khokhara Tehsil Sojat District Pali, Rajasthan. 32. Mrinal Verma S/o Shri Yogeshwar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o I-E-22, New Housing Road, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madanganj, Kisshangarh, District Ajmer, Rajasthan. 33. Sachin Patidar S/o Shri Manoj Kumar Patidar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mukam, Post Dovra, Tehsil Dungarpur, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan. 34. Himanshu Saini S/o Shri Anand Saini, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Near Goinka School, Ward No. 59, Tehsil Churu, District Churu, Rajasthan. 35. Jayanu Parmar D/o Shri Rajesh Parmar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o V.p.o. Mahuwal, Post Sarera, Tehsil Kherwara, District Udaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 294/2025 CNR: RJHC020267282025 | URN: SAW / 821U / 2025 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer - 305001 ----Appellant Versus
1. Amar Singh Saini S/o Shri Babu Lal Saini, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of 700, Dhani Sheraala, Tehsil Khetri, Village Babai, District Jhunjhunu
2. Kapil Kumar Godara S/o Shri Nand Lal, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 10, Village And Post Dhandhan, Sikar
3. Hitesh Kumar S/o Shri Tara Chand Poonia, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Vpo Nua, Poonia Market Nua, District Jhunjhunu
4. Raj Kumar Saran S/o Shri Sukha Ram Saran, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Daudsar, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu
5. Kamal Kishore Jakhar S/o Shri Manga Ram Jakhar, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 07, Hanuman Nagar, Khivtana, Post Dotina, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur. 6. Dharmveer Singh S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 39
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (30 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Years, Resident Of Village Badki Dhani, Post And Tehsil Gudagaudji, District Jhunjhunu
7. Vikas Kumar S/o Shri Shishupal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Vpo Kaseru, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu
8.
Pooja Nimber D/o Shri Sitaram Nimber, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of 964, Sankhwas, Po Sankhwas, Distt. Nagaur-341028 Nagaur. 9. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
10. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
11. Tara Chand S/o Sh. Narayan Ram, D.o.b-11.06.1993 Registration No.-Rsvc/5751/2020 Address- Village- Bajiyasar, Post- Kitalsar, Tehsil-Degana, Dist.- Nagaur, (Rajasthan) Pin 341503
12. Santosh D/o Sh. Ganesh Ram, D.o.b.- 01.07.1994 Registration No.- Rsvc/5730/2020 Address-Village Khokhara, Tehsil Sojat, Dist. Pali, (Rajasthan) Pin- 306306
13. Mrinal Verma S/o Sh. Yogeshwar, D.o.b.-05.03.1996 Registration No. Rsvc/5798/2020 Address I-E-22, New Housing Board, Khoda Ganesh Ji Road, Madangang- Kisshangarh, Dist.-Ajmer, (Rajasthan) Pin-305801
14. Sachin Patidar S/o Sh. Manoj Kumar Patidar, D.o.b.- 15.11.1995 Registration No.-Rsvc/5818/2021 Address Mukam, Post- Dovra Tehsil- Dungarpur, Dist.- Dungarpur (Rajasthan) Pin-314036
15. Himanshu Saini D/o Sh. Anand Saini, D.o.b.-07.05.1995 Registration No.- Rsvc/5692/2020 Address- Near Goinka School, Ward No. 59, Tehsil-Churu, Dist.-Churu (Rajasthan) Pin-331001
16. Jayanu Parmar D/o Sh. Rajesh Parmar, D.o.b.- 09.05.1996 Registration No. Rsvc/5693/2020 Address V.p.o.- Mahuwal, Post- Sarera, Tehsil-Kherwara, Dist.- Udaipur (Rajasthan) Pin-313804
17. Gireesh Joshi S/o Shri Jitendra Kumar Joshi, Resident Of Plot No. 80, Nalanda Vihar, Maharani Farm, Durgapura,
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (31 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Jaipur District Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 295/2025 CNR: RJHC020267152025 | URN: SAW / 823U / 2025 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer- 305001 ----Appellant Versus
1. Gajendra Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 243-244, Madhav Nagar, Opp. Durgapura Railway Station, Durgapura Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Himanshu Raj Singh Chunwawat S/o Shri Mahipal Singh Chundawat, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Gara Ekling Ji, Tehsil Aspur, Gram Panchayat Khera Aspur, Dungarpur. 3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Dr. Sachin Acharya Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Chayan Bothra, Mr. Sarthak Asopa Mr. Manoj Bhandari, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Aniket Tater & Mr. Harendra Neel Mr.
Anirudh Singh Shekhawat for Mr. Rajendra Prasad, A.G. Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit Mr. Yuvraj Samant for RPSC, with Ms. Neha Amdla, Mr. Kshitij Jain, Mr. Chinmay Surdlia & Mr. Tilak Vaid through VC Mr. Bhavit Sharma Mr. Ayush Gehlot Mr. Shubham Gupta Mr. Amogh Gupta Mr. Prashant For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Prateek Mathur Mr. Manoj Sharma AAG through VC Mr. Ravindra Jala for Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, AAG
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (32 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] Mr. Harish Purohiit Mr. Hanuman Choudhary Mr. Mahesh Thanvi Mr. Tanveer Ahmed with Mr. Iliyas Khan & Ms. Priya Prakash Ms. Pragya Thanvi Mr. Raghvendra Mundel Mr. Siddharth Shanker Sharma Mr. S.P. Sharma Mr. Raghu Nandan Sharma with Mr. Ayush Bishnoi, Ms. Pragya Seth Mr. Girdhari Lal Prajapat Mr. Sunny Choudhary HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Judgment
1. Date of conclusion of arguments
2. Date on which judgment was reserved
3. Whether the full judgment or only the operative part is pronounced:
4. Date of pronouncement 04.08.2026 04.08.2026 Full Judgment 05.09.2026 Per Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J:
1. The instant batch of intra-court appeals arises out of the common judgment dated 09.01.2025, whereby the writ petitions forming Group ‘A’ were allowed, the merit/select list issued by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission in recruitment to the post of Veterinary Officer was quashed to the extent it included candidates who had neither appeared in the Final Year Examination of B.V.Sc. nor submitted their examination forms by 24.11.2019, and the Commission was directed to prepare a fresh merit list after excluding such candidates. As a consequence, the writ petitions forming Group ‘B’ were dismissed.
1.1. Since all the appeals arise from the same common judgment and the principal controversy is common, D.B. Special Appeal Writ
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (33 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] No.675/2025, Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Durga Ram & Ors., is taken as the lead case. The factual matrix and rival
submissions are being noticed therefrom, and the decision rendered in the lead appeal shall govern the connected appeals.
1.2. The appellant in the lead appeal has claimed the following relief:
“It is, therefore, in the instant facts and circumstances it is humbly prayed before this Hon’ble Court that: 1.It may be pleased to allow the present Special Appeal and be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and common order dated 09.01.2025 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17266/2024 titled as Durga & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., and other connected petitions by the Ld. Single Judge for having been passed against the settled principles of law and in dissonance with the settled law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the writ petition of the original petitioners may kindly be ordered to be dismissed, in the interest of justice. 2.And/Or, Pass any other order that this Court may deem fit in favour of the Appellant in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.”
1.3. The lead appeal is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of 13 days’ delay in filing the appeal. The material placed on record also reflects that D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.126/2025 had earlier been preferred at the Jaipur Bench against the same common
judgment. By order dated 07.03.2025, the direction for revision of the select list was kept in abeyance and, to protect the interests of
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (34 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] the writ petitioners covered by the common judgment, the Commission and the State Government were directed not to fill up 43 posts without leave of the Court. 1.4. The connected appeals thereafter came to be heard together with the lead appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Rajasthan Public Service Commission issued advertisement dated 22.10.2019 inviting applications for recruitment to 900 posts of Veterinary Officer under the Rajasthan Animal Husbandry Service Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1963”). The prescribed qualification included a Bachelor's Degree in Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry or its equivalent from a recognised University together with the other qualifications prescribed under the Rules. 2.1. Rule 11 of the Rules of 1963 contained a proviso enabling a person who had appeared or was appearing in the Final Year Examination of the course constituting the requisite educational qualification to apply, subject to production of proof of acquisition of the requisite educational qualification at the stage prescribed therein. Where the selection was through written examination and interview, such proof was required to be produced before appearing in the interview. 2.2. The Commission thereafter conducted a shortlisting test on 02.08.2020 and declared the shortlisting result on 26.11.2020. Litigation concerning other aspects of the same recruitment had already commenced. The material on record shows that an earlier
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (35 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] round travelled through a Division Bench of this Court and thereafter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court initially permitted the interviews to proceed while restricting appointments and subsequently, by order dated 31.05.2024, permitted declaration of the result and issuance of appointment letters, expressly making the appointments subject to the outcome of the pending proceedings and clarifying that no equity could be claimed on that basis. 2.3. The controversy relevant for the present batch arose when candidates who had been admitted to or were pursuing the Final Year of the B.V.Sc. & A.H. course, but who had neither appeared in the Final Year Examination nor submitted the examination form for such examination by the last date of applications, were treated by the Commission as eligible. The writ petitioners forming Group ‘A’ questioned their inclusion in the selection.
The candidates forming Group ‘B’, whose candidature would be affected by acceptance of the challenge, sought protection of their participation and selection. 2.4. By the impugned common judgment, it was held that the expression “has appeared or is appearing in the Final Year Examination” could not be equated with mere admission to or pursuit of the Final Year of the course. The impugned judgment treated submission of the Final Year examination form and deposit of the requisite examination fee as the objective stage from which a candidate could be regarded as being in the process of appearing in such examination. It was accordingly held that
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (36 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] candidates who had merely entered the Final Year but had neither appeared in the Final Year Examination nor submitted the examination form by 24.11.2019 were not eligible under the proviso to Rule 11. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Rajasthan Public Service Commission submitted that the impugned judgment had introduced an eligibility criterion which was not expressly contained in Rule 11. It was submitted that Rule 11 did not require submission of the Final Year examination form or deposit of examination fee by the last date of application as an independent condition of eligibility. 3.1. Learned counsel submitted that the expression “appeared or is appearing in the final year examination” had to be understood in the context of the academic structure of the B.V.Sc. & A.H. course. Attention was drawn to the changes made under the Veterinary Council of India Minimum Standards of Veterinary Education Regulations, 2016 as compared with the earlier academic structure. It was urged that the course structure had materially changed and, therefore, the earlier decisions concerning preceding recruitments could not mechanically govern the present recruitment. 3.2. It was further submitted that the advertisement itself permitted candidates appearing in the Final Year of the requisite educational qualification to apply, subject to their furnishing proof of acquisition of the complete educational qualification before the interview.
According to learned counsel, the substantive
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (37 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] requirement was therefore acquisition of the prescribed qualification by the stage of interview, and a candidate who fulfilled such condition ought not to be excluded merely because the examination form had not been submitted by the last date of applications. 3.3. Learned counsel further urged that Rule 19 vested the Commission with the authority to scrutinise applications and determine eligibility. It was contended that the Commission had adopted a uniform interpretation and that judicial review could not be employed to substitute an additional eligibility condition for the one prescribed by the recruiting authority. 3.4. It was also submitted that Universities follow different practices regarding examination forms and examination fees and that adoption of such a criterion could result in differential treatment between otherwise similarly situated candidates. 3.5. Learned counsel further questioned the treatment of the Hindi stipulation contained in the advertisement. It was submitted that the impugned judgment had proceeded on the premise that there was an inadvertent omission in the advertisement and had thereby reconstructed the condition in a manner not warranted by its language. 3.6. Learned counsel appearing for the candidate-appellants whose candidature or selection stood affected substantially adopted the aforesaid submissions and urged that they had acquired the prescribed educational qualification before the stage
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (38 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] stipulated for interview and ought not to be displaced from the selection. 3.7. Reliance was also placed upon Maharashtra Public Service Commission v. Sandeep Shriram Warade, (2019) 6 SCC 362, for the proposition that prescription and determination of eligibility essentially lie within the domain of the employer and that the Court cannot recast the conditions of recruitment by interpretative rewriting. 3.8. Further reliance was also placed upon the following judgments: (a) RPSC, Ajmer Vs. Dr. Rama Singh Chundawat (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.570/2013 & other connected matters, decided by this Hon’ble Court at Jaipur Bench on 11.02.2016); (b) Babulal Kumawat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
(D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1657/2017 & other connected matters, decided by this Hon’ble Court at Jaipur Bench on 03.11.2017; (c) RPSC, Ajmer Vs. Shobha Mutha & Anr. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.674/2016 & other connected matters, decided by this Hon’ble Court on 05.01.2017; (d) RPSC, Ajmer Vs. Kamlesh Kataria & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.1373/2016 decided by this Hon’ble Court at Jaipur Bench on 10.04.2017; (e) Madras Institute of Development Studies & Anr. Vs. K. Sivasubramaniyan & Ors., (2016) 1 SCC 454;
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (39 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] (f) Dhanyay Malik & Ors. Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors. (2008) 4 SCC 171; (g) Ramesh Chandra Shah & Ors. Vs. Anil Joshi & Ors., (2013) 11 SCC 309; (h) Vijendra Kumar Verma Vs. Public Service Commission, Uttarakhand & Ors., (2011) 1 SCC 150; (I) Manish Kumar Shahi Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., (2010) 12 SCC 576; (j) Tajvir Singh Sodhi & Ors. Vs. The State of Jammu & Kashmir, (2023) 3 SCR 714; (k) Chairman, State Bank of India & Anr. Vs. M.J. James, (2022) 2 SCC 301; (l) Maharashtra Public Service Commission through its Secretary Vs. Sandeep Shriram Warade & Ors., (2019) 6 SCC 362; (m) Krishnadatt Awasthy Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. (Civil Appeal No(s). 4806/2011 & other connected matters, decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 29.01.2025; (n) Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan High Court & Ors. — 2024 INSC 847; (o) State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. v. M/s Chotra Bhai Jetha Bhai Patel Co. & Ors. — (1972) 1 SCC 209; (p) State of Gujarat v. Chaturbhuj Maganlal — (1976) 3 SCC 54; (q) Ajeet Singh Singhvi v. State of Rajasthan — 1991 Supp (1) SCC 343;
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (40 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] (r) Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. v. Century Textiles & Industries Ltd. — (2025) 3 SCC 183; (s) A.N. Roy, Commissioner of Police & Anr. v. Suresh Sham Singh — (2006) 5 SCC 745 (t) Pradeep Kumar Rai & Anr. v. Dinesh Kumar Pandey & Ors. — (2015) 11 SCC 493; (u) EERA v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
— (2017) 15 SCC 133; (v) Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Surendra Singh & Ors. — Civil Appeal No. 5588/2020, decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 01.08.2019; (w) Bowen & Ors. v. Secular Society Ltd. — [1917] AC 406 (HL); and (x) Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors. — 2026 SCC OnLine SC 796. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the contesting private respondents/original writ petitioners submitted that the language of Rule 11 was clear. It was urged that the Rule did not use the expression “studying in the Final Year” or “admitted to the Final Year”, but specifically used the expression “has appeared or is appearing in the Final Year Examination”. 4.1. Learned counsel submitted that the proviso to Rule 11 constituted a limited relaxation from the ordinary requirement of possessing the complete qualification at the time of applying and could be invoked only by candidates who fell within the class expressly identified therein. It was urged that acquisition of the
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (41 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] complete qualification before interview constituted a subsequent requirement and could not dispense with the anterior requirement of being a candidate who had appeared or was appearing in the Final Year Examination on the relevant date. 4.2. Learned counsel further submitted that submission of an examination form was not treated by the impugned judgment as a separate educational qualification but merely as objective evidence that the candidate had crossed the stage of being a student of the Final Year and had entered the process of appearing in the Final Year Examination. 4.3. Reliance was placed upon the earlier decisions of this Court in Rameshwar Prasad Choudhary and Manoj Kumar and upon the Division Bench judgment dated 25.08.2017 in the appeal arising from Manoj Kumar, wherein the same statutory expression was considered in the context of earlier recruitment to the post of Veterinary Officer. It was submitted that the statutory Rule had remained unchanged. The impugned judgment also noticed and relied upon those decisions. 4.4.
It was further submitted that any ambiguity or drafting deficiency in the advertisement could not override the statutory Rules. The advertisement itself referred candidates to the Rules of 1963 and, therefore, eligibility had necessarily to be determined under Rule 11. 4.5. On the objection concerning delay and acquiescence, learned counsel submitted that the writ petitioners were not questioning a recruitment condition which had operated against them after they
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (42 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] had participated in the process; rather, their grievance was against the Commission's subsequent action of including persons who, according to them, did not satisfy Rule 11. It was therefore urged that the cause for challenge arose upon such inclusion in the select list. 4.6. In support of such submissions, reliance has been placed on the following judgments: (a) Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.858/2016, decided by this Hon’ble Court on 28.08.2017; (b) Rameshwar Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.931/2024 & other connected matter, decided by this Hon’ble Court on 04.11.2025; (c) Rakesh Bakshi & Anr. Vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors., (2019) 3 SCC 511; (d) Jomon K.K. Vs. Shajimon P. & Ors., 2025 INSC 425; (e) The State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Anju Rini Saini (Civil Appeal No.872/2022, decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.02.2022; and (f) RPSC Vs. Lavanshu Sankhla & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.____of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.32964 of 2025) & other connected matters, decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court on
04.05.2026. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (43 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
5.1. The principal question requiring consideration is whether a person who was merely admitted to or pursuing the Final Year of the B.V.Sc.
& A.H. course, but had neither appeared in nor reached the stage of appearing in the Final Year Examination by 24.11.2019, could claim the benefit of the proviso to Rule 11 merely because the requisite educational qualification was subsequently acquired before the interview. 5.2. Rule 11, insofar as relevant, reads as under:
“11. Academic and Technical Qualifications:- A candidate for direct recruitment to the post specified in the Schedule shall possess (1) the qualifications given in Column 4 of the Schedule, and (2) Working knowledge of Hindi written in Devnagri Script and knowledge of Rajasthani culture. Provided that the person who has appeared or is appearing in the final year examination of the course which is the requisite educational qualification for the post as mentioned in the rules or schedule for direct recruitment, shall be eligible to apply for the post but he/ she shall have to submit proof of having acquired the requisite educational qualification to the appropriate selection agency:- (i) before appearing in the main examination, where selection is made through two stages of written examination and interview; (ii) before appearing in interview where selection is made through written examination and interview; (iii) before appearing in the written examination or interview where selection is made through only written examination or only interview, as the case may be.”
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (44 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
5.3. This Court finds that the proviso contemplates two distinct stages. 5.3.1. The first determines who is entitled to apply despite not yet possessing the completed educational qualification. For obtaining such benefit, the candidate must be a person who “has appeared or is appearing in the final year examination”. 5.3.2. The second determines the stage by which such candidate must produce proof that the complete educational qualification has subsequently been acquired. The latter requirement does not obliterate the former. 5.4.
This Court observes that acceptance of the construction urged by the appellants would result in replacing the expression “is appearing in the Final Year Examination” with the materially wider expression “is studying in the Final Year”. The Rule does not employ the latter expression. The words “Final Year Examination” have a definite statutory significance and cannot be rendered redundant while interpreting the proviso. 5.5. This Court further observes that the impugned judgment cannot fairly be understood as prescribing the filing of an examination form or payment of examination fee as a new educational qualification. The question before the Court was whether a candidate who had merely entered the Final Year could nevertheless be described as one who “is appearing in the Final Year Examination”. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (45 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
5.5.1. In that context, submission of the examination form and deposit of the examination fee were treated as objective indicia showing that a candidate had crossed the stage of merely pursuing the Final Year and had entered the process relating to the ensuing Final Year Examination. 5.5.2. In the present controversy, the exclusion was confined to candidates who had neither actually appeared in the Final Year Examination nor even submitted the examination form by the relevant date. The impugned judgment therefore did not substitute a different educational qualification for the one prescribed by Rule 11; it applied the statutory expression to the factual stage reached by the candidates. 5.6. The distinction assumes further significance because the proviso is itself an exception to the ordinary requirement of possessing the prescribed educational qualification. The relaxation cannot be extended beyond the class identified by the Rule. A candidate who does not satisfy the first limb cannot invoke the second limb merely because he or she subsequently completed the qualification before the interview. 5.7.
The contention based upon the changed course structure under the Regulations of 2016 also does not persuade this Court to adopt a construction contrary to the language of Rule 11. The academic structure may have changed, but Rule 11 was not correspondingly amended so as to replace “appeared or is appearing in the Final Year Examination” with “admitted to or studying in the Final Year”. [2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (46 of 49) [SAW-675/2025]
5.7.1. If the altered academic regime has rendered the existing statutory formulation inappropriate for future recruitments, the matter lies within the domain of the competent rule-making authority. The recruiting agency cannot, through administrative interpretation, alter the class of candidates whom the statutory proviso makes eligible. 5.8. The latest reiteration of the governing principle is found in Md. Firoz Mansuri & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors., 2026 INSC
68. In paragraph 59, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed:
“Courts cannot rewrite service rules, determine equivalence of qualifications, or substitute their own assessment for that of the employer.” The same paragraph recognises the employer's domain in determining qualifications while making it clear that such authority cannot be exercised arbitrarily. 5.9. The aforesaid principle does not assist the appellants in the manner suggested. This Court is not prescribing a qualification which the employer ought to have prescribed. The qualification and the statutory relaxation already stand prescribed by Rule 11. The judicial inquiry is only whether the Commission's application of that Rule remained within its text. This Court finds that enlarging “appeared or is appearing in the Final Year Examination” so as to include every person merely admitted to the Final Year would itself amount to altering the statutory condition. 5.10. Reliance upon Maharashtra Public Service Commission v. Sandeep Shriram Warade (supra), also does not alter the
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (47 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] conclusion. The principle laid down therein is that courts cannot, by interpretative rewriting, substitute their own eligibility requirements where the Rules and advertisement are clear. Applied to the present case, the said principle requires fidelity to Rule 11.
The Commission's domain under Rule 19 cannot extend to giving the proviso a meaning which removes the words “Final Year Examination” from practical operation. 5.11. This Court further finds that Rule 19, which entrusts scrutiny of applications to the Commission and accords finality to its decision concerning eligibility, has to operate subject to the statutory qualifications prescribed by the Rules themselves. The power to scrutinise eligibility is not a power to alter eligibility. 5.12. The earlier decisions in Rameshwar Prasad Choudhary (supra), including the Division Bench judgment dated 25.08.2017, were also appropriately noticed in the impugned
judgment. Those decisions arose in an earlier academic setting, and the factual distinction urged by the appellants has been considered. Nevertheless, the statutory proposition for which those decisions were noticed remains relevant: mere progression in the academic course is not equivalent to having appeared or being in the process of appearing in the Final Year Examination where the governing Rule specifically uses the latter expression. 5.13. This Court also finds no reason to interfere merely because the Hindi stipulation in the advertisement was not happily worded. The decisive source of eligibility is the statutory Rule. Where the
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (48 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] advertisement admits of a construction inconsistent with Rule 11, the Rule must prevail. 5.13.1. It is therefore unnecessary for this Court to approve every expression employed in the impugned judgment concerning the drafting of the advertisement. The ultimate conclusion can be sustained on the plain language of Rule 11 itself. 5.14. The plea concerning delay and acquiescence also does not warrant interference. The contesting writ petitioners were not seeking to avoid a condition of recruitment after having unsuccessfully participated under it. Their grievance was directed against the Commission's action of treating other candidates as eligible in a manner which, according to them, was contrary to Rule 11. The impugned judgment found that the cause of action arose when such candidates were included in the select list. The distinction drawn from cases relating to participation in a selection followed by a challenge to the procedure of selection is therefore well founded. 5.15. The plea of equity on behalf of candidates who subsequently came to be selected or appointed also cannot override the statutory requirement. The order dated 31.05.2024 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as reproduced in the record, expressly permitted declaration of result and issuance of appointment letters subject to the outcome of the pending proceedings, with a further direction that the selected candidates were to be notified that they would not be entitled to claim equity on that ground. Thus, the
[2026:RJ-JD:42855-DB] (49 of 49) [SAW-675/2025] appointments made during pendency of the litigation were always subject to the adjudication of eligibility. 5.16. On consideration of the entire matter, this Court finds that the essential conclusion recorded in the impugned judgment is consistent with Rule 11.
A candidate merely pursuing the Final Year, who had neither appeared in the Final Year Examination nor reached the stage reflected by submission of the Final Year examination form by the last date of applications, could not claim the statutory relaxation merely because the complete educational qualification was acquired subsequently before the interview. 5.17. This Court accordingly finds no ground warranting interference with the impugned common judgment in exercise of the intra-court appellate jurisdiction. 6.1. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.675/2025 is dismissed. The common judgment dated 09.01.2025 is affirmed. 6.2. Since the connected appeals arise from the same common
judgment and the common question raised therein stands concluded by the determination made in the lead appeal, as indicated above, the rest of the instant appeals are also dismissed in terms of the present judgment.
6.3. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J Skant/-