Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ms Nandini Bakshi And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 8 June, 2018
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writs No. 12361/2018
1. Ms. Nandini Bakshi D/o Col. Niraj Bakshi, Aged About 18
Years, Resident Of Group Headquarter Ncc, Kherli Phatak,
Kota, Rajasthan.
2. Col. Niraj Bakshi S/o Shri K.c. Bakshi, Aged About 51
Years, Resident Of Group Headquarter Ncc, Kherli Phatak,
Kota, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of
Defence, South Block, New Delhi.
2. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department Of Medical Health, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur.
3. Chairman, Neet Ug Medical Dental Admission/counseling
Board-2017 And Principal, Ruhs College Of Dental
Sciences And Hospital, Jaipur.
4. The Convener, Neet Examination Cum Central Board Of
Secondary Education, Dehli Through Its Secretary.
5. Secretary, Kendriya Sainik Board, Department Of Ex-
Servicemen Welfare, Wing-Vii, West Block-Iv, R.k. Puram,
New Delhi.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Jaiman For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH (V.J.) Order 08/06/2018 Petitioners belong to wards of disabled ex-servicemen and according to circular order dated 03.06.1994, priority of petitioners for admission was fixed at priority No.II.
(2 of 2) [CW-12361/2018] Counsel for the petitioners submits that vide circular order dated 21.05.2018, the respondents have taken a decision to shift the petitioners from priority No.II to priority No.VIII. Counsel further submits that change of criteria of priority is unreasonable and arbitrary, hence prayed for quashing the same.
I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners and in my view, since father of the petitioner no.1 is still in service and have not retired service and the priority No.II has been given to the wards of disabled ex-servicemen, as such petitioners' case is not at all covered under the Priority No.II and besides, the policy decision taken by the respondents of changing priority of the petitioner does not require any interference by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH (V.J.)),J Heena/93