[2026:RJ-JP:6506-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 769/2025 1. The State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary Ayurved Department, Secretariat, Jaipur Raj. 2. The Deputy Secretary, Ayush Department, State Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Appellants Versus 1. Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/o Babulal Sharma, VPO- Mandawari, Dausa 2. Hari Om Sharma S/o Shri Ram Swaroop Sharma, Dr. Hari Charan Wali Gali, Shivpuri-B, Gangapur, Sawaimadhopur 3. Mangilal S/o Shri Digambal Lal, Nayagaon Mafi, Pali, Bharatpur-321601 4. Anuj Kumar Garg S/o Shri Amarchand Garg, Village And Post- Gulpara, Distt.- Bharatpur 5. Narottam Lal Sharma S/o Shri Prabhu Lal Sharma, Village Kishorpur, Post Pavata Gaddi, Teh- Wazirpur Gangapur City, Dis Sawaimadhopur 6. Praveen Kumar Dave S/o Shri Badri Narayan Dave, 981 Pitra Chhaya, Gyan Nagar, Hiran Magri, Sector No.4, Manwa Khera Udaipur (Raj.) - 313002 7. Raj Kumar Gautam C/o Rajkumar, Ward No.10, Neemsara, Kota 8. Neeraj Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Om Prakash Sharma, C- 17, Riddhika Nagar, Distt.- Baran- Rajasthan 9. Kanhya Lal Sharma S/o Shri Ghanshyam Sharma, A-167, Krishna Nagar, Tripoliya Bazar, Brampuri Road, Jaipur 10. Jagdish Prasad Sharma S/o Late Shri Gaya Prasad Sharma, 124, Near Ram Mandir , Ward No. 16, Nasia Colony, Gangapur, Distt.- Sawaimadhopur (Raj.)-322201 11. Mahendra Kumar Kedawat S/o Shri Ram Karan Gupta, 18, Nand Bhawan, Main Choraha, Jaisinghpura, Lalwas, CRPF Camp, Lalwas, Jaipur 302027 12. Jitendra Sharma S/o Shri Har Prasad Sharma, Shringar Chawari, Bihari Ganj, Ajmer (Raj.) 13. Kapil Dev Sharma, S/o Shri Damodar Prasad Sharma, [2026:RJ-JP:6506-DB] (2 of 4) [SAW-769/2025] 182, Court Road, Gangapurcity, Distt.- Sawaimadhopur. 14. Pralayankar Naryayan Agarwal S/o Shri Prahlad Narayan Agarwal, Gitalok, Keshavrajji Ki Gali, Bhagwatgarh, Sawai Madhopur 15. Brij Nandan Jaimini S/o Shri Kistur Chand, Ward No.3, Kalyanji Ke Mandir Ke Pas, Gangapur City, Gangapur, Sawai Madhopur 16. Anil Kumar Jain S/o Bharat Bhushan Jain, 423, Scheme No. 10, Vivek Vihar Alwar (Raj.) 17. Kaushal Kishor Sharma S/o Late Chhitar Mal Sharma, R/o F-4 Surya Nagar, Alwar 18. Deendayal Sharma S/o Ramkishor Sharma, R/o Phulawara, Wazeerpur, Sawai Madhopur 19. Arvind Kumar Gautam S/o Prem Prakash Gautam, R/o Kawaspura Puliya Ke Pas, Nathkeda, Antah, Baran ----Respondents/Petitioners 20. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Kadwad, Jodhpur-Nagaur Highway Road, Jodhpur-342037 Through Its Vice-Chancellor ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma,AAAG For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishabh Khandelwal through VC HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA Order 11/02/2026 1. An application (CMCW No.710/2025) has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. For the grounds mentioned in the application filed u/s 5 of the Limitation Act, delay is condoned and the application is accordingly allowed. [2026:RJ-JP:6506-DB] (3 of 4) [SAW-769/2025] 3. The issue raised in the present appeal is no more res integra, as the bunch of Special Appeal Writs have been decided at the Principal Seat, Jodhpur, in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.1123/2024 titled The State of Rajasthan And Ors. vs. Dr. Ali Taqi And Ors. and other connected matters, decided on 09.09.2025 wherein, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has set aside the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge granting cumulative age relaxation and held as under:- “7.16. Tested on these touchstones, the respondents/writ petitioners cannot claim cumulative relaxation, as the Rules of 1973 are silent and the advertisement explicitly rules out such aggregation. Thus the binding terms of the advertisement cannot be disregarded and travelled beyond the governing framework. 7.17. Thus, in view of the foregoing discussion, this Court holds that the Rules of 1973 do not envisage cumulative age relaxation across different categories. Each relaxation under Rule 9 of the said Rules is to be applied independently within its own sphere. The express stipulation in the advertisement that relaxations shall be non-cumulative is consistent with the statutory framework and cannot be termed arbitrary or de hors the Rules. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was not justified in directing the appellants to extend cumulative relaxation to the respondents.” 4. In view of the above judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of The State of Rajasthan And Ors. vs. Dr. Ali Taqi And Ors. (supra), the present appeal stands allowed mutatis mutandis. [2026:RJ-JP:6506-DB] (4 of 4) [SAW-769/2025] 5. All pending application(s) also stand disposed of. (SANGEETA SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Simple Kumawat /71