Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7905 (RAJ)

MOHAMMAD BILAL KHAN S/O MOHAMMAD RAFIK KHAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/4677/2025 · 2026-05-22

Anand Sharma

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:21941] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4677/2025 Mohammad Bilal Khan S/o Mohammad Rafik Khan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Paras Nagar, Post Kidhwana, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Social Justice And Empowerment Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Having Its Office At Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur- 302018 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanveer Ahamad For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singhal for respondent No.2 Mr. Ashutosh Udawat with Mr. Prateek Saxena for Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 22/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents themselves have revised the result, and as per the revised result, respondents are in the process of filling the vacancies. Learned counsel submits that on account of the fact that as per interim order dated 01.04.2025 passed by this Court, the respondents were directed to keep one post vacant, qua the petitioner. Despite the fact that petitioner is higher in merit, he has not been considered. [2026:RJ-JP:21941] (2 of 2) [CW-4677/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for modifying the interim relief earlier granted by this Court. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents although did not oppose the prayer, however, submitted that merely the fact that the petitioner have been provisionally included in the select list, would not confer any eligibility upon the petitioner. 4. In view of above, with the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is being finally disposed of. 5. The respondents are directed to re-consider the candidature of the petitioner, and if, he is otherwise eligible and falls at suitable place in the select list, the respondents may proceed further for appointment on the post, which has been kept vacant in compliance of the interim order dated 01.04.2025. 6. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations. 7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /150