[2026:RJ-JP:4385] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13005/2021 Attar Singh Jatav S/o Shri Rattiram Ji, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Village Karodiya, Aalawada, Post Dhindhora, Block Hindaun, District Karauli. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Secretary, Department Of School Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. The District Collector, Collectorate, Karauli. 4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Karauli. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Saxena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 30/01/2026 1. Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with following prayer: “The Hon ble Court may kindly be pleased to kindly call the entire record of the case and quash the action of the respondent as well as the order dated 01.10.2018 and the respondent may kindly be directed to consider the grievances of the petitioner and made the fare and transparent selection and if the petitioner are found in the order of merit he may be given appointment on the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak with all consequtional benefit. 2. Any order prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner, if passed during the pendency of the writ petition, the same [2026:RJ-JP:4385] (2 of 2) [CW-13005/2021] may kindly be taken on record and be pleased to quash and set aside. 3. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may consider just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. 4. Cost of writ petition may be quantified in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring and relying upon judgment dated 24.05.2017 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1032/2017 titled as “Sunita Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.” submits that the controversy and the issue raised herein is already settled by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court. He further submitted that instant writ petition be disposed of in accordance with aforesaid order. 3. Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and also material placed on record, the writ petition is disposed in light of Sunita Sharma (supra). 4. Needless to say that if ratio is applicable upon facts of the case as claimed by the petitioner, then same benefits be extended. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /69