Harun Rashid S/O Mohammed Saleem vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 July, 2023

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Harun Rashid S/O Mohammed Saleem vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 July, 2023

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10789/2023
1. Mohd. Farhan S/o Mohd. Ismail, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
24714 Meethi Kothi, Tiba Puriyan, Ramganj Bazar, Jaipur
302003
2. Mohd. Rehan Ansari S/o Mohd. Azeem Ansari, Aged About 26
Years, R/o House No. 3, Azeej Colony, Char Darwaja, Jaipur
302002
3. Zeeshan S/o Sadiq Khan, Aged About 24 Years, R/o R/3178
Pannigaran Ka Mohalla Chokdi Ramchandra Ji Ki, Jaipur
302002
4. Mohd. Shahid S/o Abdul Gani, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Mohalla, Ghoda Nikas Road Ramganj, Jaipur 302003
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Deputy Govt. Secretary,
Ayruved Department Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Secretary Govt. Of Rajasthan, Department Of Ayurved, Yog
And Natural Treatment, Siddhant And Homeopathi (Ayush)
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director Unani Treatment Department, Jaipur.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10578/2023
Syed Shahbaz Naqvi S/o Syed Alladiya Naqvi, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o Mohalla Sadat, Near Badi Masjid, Malpura, Tonk Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat
Jaipur
2. Director, Directorate Of Unani Chikitsa, Ayush Bhawan, Sector-
26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10795/2023
1. Aslam Khan S/o Abdul Hamid, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Dhaniya Near Masjid, Nh No.15, Hindalgoal, Jor, Jodhpur
2. Yaru Khan S/o Dost Mohammad, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Gaiya Ki Dhani, Moriya Munhjsar, Jodhdpur
3. Zakia Nazneen D/o Mohammad Syeed, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o 706, Shivaji Nagar, Near Bilal Masjid, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur
4. Bhauddin S/o Abdul Wahid, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Iqbalpuram, Makrana, Nagaur
5. Shahdab Ali S/o Shri Shahjad Ali, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
11B, Gali No.2, Dargaha Colony, Outside Chardarwaja, Jaipur
6. Nazo Khan D/o Rafiqu Khan, Aged About 23 Years, R/o 12,

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (2 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

Subhash Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat
Jaipur
2. Director, Directorate Of Unani Chikitsa, Ayush Bhawan, Sector-
26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11009/2023
1. Imran Khan S/o Shri Daulat Khan, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
33-A, Shanti Nagar, Joshi Marg, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Mohammed Owais S/o Mumtaz Ahmed, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o 25, Shafakat Colony, Char Darwaja Baha, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
3. Adiba Mantasha D/o Mohd Saeed Khan, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Kallan Shah Colony, Bas Badanpura, Tripoliya Bazar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Deputy Secretary, Ayush
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. (Ayurved, Yoga
And Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homeopathy (Ayush)
Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur)
2. The Registrar, Dr. Sarvpalli Radhakrishanan Rajasthan Aryudic
University, Nagaur Road, Karvad, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11019/2023
Yadvendra Singh S/o Shri Shiv Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Village Reenjhwas, Post Pali, Tehsil Hindaun City, District Karauli
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Ayurved, Homeopathy And Indian Medical, Govt. Of Rajasthan
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Dy. Secretary, Department Of Ayurved, Homeopathy And
Indian Medical, Govt. Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Homeopathy Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur
4. Registrar, Dr. Sarvpalli Radhakrishan Rajasthan Homeopathy
University, Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11169/2023
1. Harun Rashid S/o Mohammed Saleem, Aged About 27 Years,
R/o Kakod, Tonk, Rajasthan-304024
2. Atish Khan S/o Intjar Ali, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Chhota
Bazar, Mohalla Saray, Sambhar Lake, Jaipur, Rajasthan-

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (3 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

303604
3. Abdul Rehman Khan S/o Abdul Hamid Khan, Aged About 23
Years, R/o Habibya Unani Dawakhana, Gehlot Road, Baheer,
Tonk, Rajasthan-304001
4. Mohammed Ismaeel S/o Mohammed Akhtar, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Madina Masjid Ke Saamne Wali Gali, Phoolpura,
Basni Belima, Nagaur, Rajasthan-341021
5. Mohammad Aslam S/o Walee Mohammad, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Ishak Khan Ki Dhani, Salwa Khurd, Pipar Road,
Pipar City, Jodhour, Rajasthan-342606
6. Mohammed Zahid Gauri S/o Abdul Salam Gauri, Aged About
27 Years, R/o Gauri House, Behind Satra Plaaza, Near Zubeda
Masjid, Nai Sarak Khaniya, Jodhpur-342001
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat
Jaipur-302005
2. Director, Directorate Of Unani Chikitsa, Ayush Bhawan, Sector-
26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road ,district Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11352/2023
1. Istuti D/o Rajesh Kumar Sharma, R/o Ward No. 11, Harsoli,
Alwar.
2. Shivani Singh D/o Bhanwar Singh Sagar, R/o Nagla, Kataran,
Hatijar, Bharatpur.
3. Priyanshi Singh D/o Rahul Singh, R/o Vop Kherli, Gadasia,
Tehsil Bayana, Bharatpur.
4. Garima Shukla D/o Ravindra Kumar Shukla, R/o Ward No. 2,
Sadar Bajaar, Shiv Mandir Ke Pass, Beawar, Khas, Ajmer.
5. Om Prakash Meena S/o Prahlad Narayan Meena, R/o Shri Ram
Nagar, Jagatpura, Opposite Kundanpura, Jaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Ayurved
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Deputy Secretary, Ayush Department, State Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Ayurvedic Department, Ashok Marg, Savitri College
Chauraha, Ajmer.
4. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Kadwad, Jodhpur-Nagaur Highway Road, Jodhpur-342037
Through Its Registrar.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11354/2023
Pragya Tripathi D/o Shri Gopal Sharma, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Surya Mandir, Nainagri Mohalla, Malpura, Tonk Rajasthan

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (4 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11021/2023
Dr. Tejasvi Jodha D/o Gajendra Singh Jodha, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o 66, Janak Vihar, Sirsi Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Ayurveda, Yoga And
Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homeopathy (Ayush), Ayush
Bhawan, 60 Feet 2Nd Rd, Near Water Tank, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Registrar, Kadvad, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
342037.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11105/2023
Gaveshana Jangid D/o Shri Mukut Bihari, Aged About 22 Years, R/o
Sector-19, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.)- 302033.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (5 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

2. Deputy Secretary, Department Of Ayush, Government Of
Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District Jodhpur.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11126/2023
Shivangi Sharma D/o Shri Deendayal Sharma, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o 1/88, Housing Board, Jawahar Nagar, Bharatpur (321001).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Deputy Secretary, Department Of Ayush, Government Of
Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Naguar Road District Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11025/2023

Ms.aqsa Khanam D/o Abdul Salam, Aged About 23 Years, R/o 56-A
Pragati Nagar, Bajrang Nagar Police Line, Kota, Kota, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat
Jaipur
2. Director, Directorate Of Unani Chikitsa, Ayush Bhawan,
Sector-26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11028/2023
1. Sara Khan D/o M. Iqbal Khan, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
1079, Ramnagar, Shastri Nagar Jaipur Rajasthan
2. Nagma Bano D/o Mohammed Younus, Aged About 22 Years,
R/o 4354 Top Khane Ka Rasta Chandpole Bazar Jaipur
Rajasthan
3. Shabnam Bano D/o Nijamuddin Khan, Aged About 22
Years, R/o 175, Jp Colony, Sec. No. 03, Ram Nagar, Shastri
Nagar, Jaipur. Rajasthan
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (6 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

2. Director, Directorate Of Unani Chikitsa, Ayush Bhawan,
Sector-26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District
Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11449/2023
Vinod Kumar Meena S/o Shri Madan Lal Meena, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Village Chitava, Tehsil Keshoraipatn, District Bundi
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11456/2023
1. Rajat Kaushik S/o Shri Jag Mohan Kaushik, Aged About 24
Years, R/o A-85, Ashok Vihar, Alwar
2. Ratan Singh S/o Shri Daleep Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o Village Goonta, District Alwar
3. Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Gangadeen, R/o Meghwal Mohalla,
Goonta, District Alwar
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11471/2023
Samreen Naz D/o Abdul Salam, Aged About 27 Years, R/o 03,
Nainwa Road, Near Naala, Shastri Nagar, Bundi, District Bundi
Rajasthan. 323001
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary
Ayurved Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (7 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

2. Deputy Secretary, Ayush Department, State Of Rajasthan
Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Ayurvedic Department, Ashok Marg, Savitri
College Chauraha, Ajmer.
4. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Kadwad, Jodhpur-Nagaur Highway Road,
Jodhpur-342037 Through Its Registrar
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11475/2023

1. Anisha Yadav D/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Yadav, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Dagar Krishi Farm, Khorabeesal Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Anita D/o Shri Virendra Kumar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Village Ajabpura, Tehsil Thanagazi, Alwar (Raj.)
3. Vinita Dhakad D/o Shri Lalchand Nagar, Aged About 23
Years, R/o Keshav Niwas, Aam Rasta Kanwalda Golana,
Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
4. Madhavi Tiwari D/o Shri Shyam Bihari Tiwari, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Village Kanwarpura Dungarji Kota, Rajasthan.
5. Seema Dangi D/o Shri Laxmi Chand Dangi, Aged About 24
Years, R/o 1, Dangiyan Odiya Kheri, Jhalawar Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department
Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan, Government
Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer.
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District Jodhpur.
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11579/2023
Nirmala Paliwal D/o Shri Kani Ram Paliwal, Aged About 24 Years,
Resident Of Village Taliya Choudhariya Ka Vas, Chila, Phloadi,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342301
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Ayurved,
Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homeopathy (Ayush)
Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Ayurved Department, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurveda University,
Jodhpur Through Its Registrar, Kadwad, Nagaur Road,
Jodhpur-342037
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11596/2023

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (8 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

Ajay Kumar Jatav S/o Shri Mukesh Chand, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o Rarodiya Ka Pura, Alawara, Dhindora, Karauli, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District
Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11600/2023
1. Aarti Meena D/o Shri R.d. Meena, Aged About 23 Years, R/o
T-2/3, Frq Complex, Sajjan Nagar, Girwa Udaipur
2. Shubham Gangwal S/o Shri Hajarilal Gangwal, Aged About
28 Years, R/o Outside Char Darwaja, Mandi Khatikan,
Pahadiya Chowk, Jaipur
3. Anju Meena W/o Shri Mukesh Kumar Meena, Aged About 32
Years, R/o B-10,j.p. Colony, Tonk Phatak, Lal Kothi, Gandhi
Nagar Jaipur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur
2. Director, Directorate Of Unani Chikitsa, Ayush Bhawan,
Sector-26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road District
Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11819/2023
Shiba Khan D/o Dr. Rizwan Ahmad, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Dargarh Market, Tala, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Ayurved,
Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha And Homeopathy
(Ayush) Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Director, Unani Department, Ajmer.
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Kadwad, Nagaur Road, Jodhpur - 342037.
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11704/2023

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (9 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

1. Purshottam Gurjar S/o Shri Ramchandra Gurjar, Aged
About 25 Years, R/o Vpo Bhabru, Tehsil Virat Nagar,
District Jaipur Rajasthan
2. Deepak Teli S/o Shri Devi Lal Teli, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Bhilo Ki Jhopariya, Chittaurgarh Rajasthan
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10282/2023
1. Pallavi Mandawat Daughter Of Shri Ramakant, Aged About
25 Years, Resident Of B-20, Parshawnathpuram, Kunhari,
Kota.
2. Pallavi Sharma Daughter Of Shri Siyaram Sharma, Aged
About 25 Years, Resident Of Ghantaghar Road, Dholpur
3. Janvi Jain Daughter Of Shri Mahaveer Jain, Aged About 23
Years, Resident Of Village Kuwan, Tehsil Chikhali, District
Dungarpur
4. Himakshi Purohit Daughter Of Shri Ravindra Kumar
Purohit, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Vpo Padardi
Badi, Tehsil Sagwarda, District Dungarpur.
5. Purvi Jain Daughter Of Shri Gehari Lal Jain, Aged About
24 Years, Resident Of Village And Tehsil Chakhali, District
Dungapur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Ayush
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Deputy Secretary, Ayush Department, Government
Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Ayurved Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Ajmer.
4. Dr. Sarvapalli Radha Krishan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar At Nagaur District
Jodhpur.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9760/2023
Kalpana Chhaniwal D/o Ashok Kumar Chhaniwal, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Plot No.33, Nbc Colony, Behind Daulat Guest House,
Tonk Rajasthan

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (10 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10331/2023
1. Dr. Monika Yadav Daughter Of Shri Radhey Shyam Yadav,
Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Village And Post
Ratanpura, Tehsil Bansoor, District Alwar (Raj.)
2. Dr. Vandana Bhargava Daughter Of Shri Pyare Lal
Bhargav, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Behind Power
House, Ward No. 15, Tara Nagar, District Churu (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Dy. Secretary
(Administration), Ayurved, Yoga And Naturopathy, Unani,
Siddha And Homeopathy (Ayush) Department,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Director, Ayurved, Yoga And Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha
And Homeopathy (Ayush) Department, Directorate Of
Ayurved, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10345/2023
1. Sweety Solanki D/o Shri Dullichand, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Ward No.3, Pokharan Jaisalmer District Jaisalmer
2. Divya Vyas D/o Shri Kamlesh Vyas, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o Vyas Chowk, Pokharan, Jaisalmer, District Jaisalmer
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10346/2023
1. Ankita Chouhan @ Dabi D/o Shri Kishore Kumar Dabi,
Aged About 26 Years, R/o House No.36, Mahalaxmi Girls
School, Uit Pratap Nagar, Vtc Jodhpur, Po Jodhpur, District
Jodhpur

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (11 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

2. Abhilasha Deegwal D/o Ramgopal Deegwal, Aged About
25 Years, R/o 10, Ambedkar Colony, Mandawara,
Jhunjhunu
3. Bhavesh Dendor S/o Babulal Dendor, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Ward No.4, Aakashani Colony, Navadera,
Dungarpur
4. Bhoomika Naval D/o Shri Rajendra Naval, Aged About 25
Years, R/o 44, Parihar Nagar Bhadwasia Jodhpur
5. Pramil Bagoria S/o Ashok Kumar Bagoria, Aged About 24
Years, R/o 188-A, Vaidhji Ka Chauraha, Murlipura, Jaipur
6. Rachna Meena D/o Shri Rajesh Kumar, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Meena Mohalla, Beri Tehsil Surajgarh District
Jhunjhunu
7. Kavita Meena D/o Shri Ramjilal Meena, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Sarsop, Sawaimadhopur
8. Shivani Mehar D/o Shri D.r. Meena, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o 63, Arwali Hills Colony, Near Railway Basti, Jagatpura,
Jaipur
9. Bhawna Ninama D/o Shri Dhirajmal Ninama, Aged About
24 Years, R/o Mukam Post Padoli Gordhan, Tehsil Ghatol
District Banswara
10. Pooja Jain D/o Shri Ashok Kumar Jain, Aged About 24
Years, R/o Para Ajmer Gopal Rajasthan
11. Neha Janu D/o Narendra Janu, R/o Kisai, Jhunjhunu
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10347/2023
1. Divya Bairwa D/o Shri Ramkishore Bairwa, Aged About 25
Years, R/o 16A Maruti Colony, Sheopur Road, Pratap
Nagar, Jaipur
2. Kiran Chandolia D/o Shri Maliram Chandolia, Aged About
24 Years, R/o 83-2, Shiv Nagar 5 Macheda Harmada,
Jaipur
3. Deeksha Mudgal D/o Shri Ramkishan Sharma, Aged About
25 Years, R/o Bhikhawas, Alwar
4. Ekta Gupta D/o Shri Hariom Gupta, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o Ward No.20, Near Sitaram Mandir, Anand Nagar
Colony, Khairthal, Alwar
5. Twinkle Ahari D/o Shri Pritam Ahari, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Church Road, Near Dak Bangla, Kherwara Udaipur
6. Mayank Raot S/o Mr. Devilal Roat, Aged About 26 Years,

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (12 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

R/o Ner Govt. School, Sector-4 (Eklavya Nagar)
Gokulpura, Dungarpur
7. Mohit Singh S/o Shri Bhagweant Singh, Aged About 28
Years, R/o 14-B, Surya Nagar Tarron Ki Koot, Tonk Road,
Jaipuer
8. Neetu Kheenchi D/o Rajendra Kumar Kheenchi, Aged
About 29 Years, R/o Opposite State Bank, Tehsil Amer,
Chonp, Jaipur
9. Nidhi Sahrma D/o Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 24 Years, R/o Village And Post Roopaspur, Tehsil
Badi, District Dholpur
10. Kirti Garasia D/o Shri Dikpal Garasia, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Mata Fala, Ummed Garhi, Banswara
11. Payal Kumari Tabiyar D/o Shri Kantilal Ji Tabiyar, Aged
About 25 Years, R/o Dhanota, Post Sundrav Tehsil
Anandpura District Banswara
12. Shivani Nayak D/o Shri Kanhaiyalal Nayak, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Adiwali, Kherwada District Udaipur
13. Anuja Garasia D/o Shri Pradeep Garasia, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Village Sevaniya, Post Mahudi Tehsil Sajjangarh
Nct Banswara
14. Pallavi Kaant D/o Shri Ramesh Chand Kaant, Aged About
25 Years, R/o Village Chothmal Barjdia, Tehsil Anandpuri
Banswara
15. Anjali Meena D/o Shri Mahadeev Meena, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Jad Ka Naya Gaon, Post Bada Naya Gaon
District Bundi
16. Jai Kishan Diya D/o Ramlal Diya, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o 176/28 Shrangar Cjhanwari, Ward No.41, Ajmer
17. Komal Meghwal D/o Mangilal Meghwal, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Gurda, Tehsil Jhadol, Gurad Udaipur
18. Antima Meena D/o Mohanlal Meena, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o Ward No.6, Meerna Mohalla, Nemli Kherli, Tanwaran,
Kota
19. Meena Morya D/o Shri Ramnarayan Morya, R/o Village
Manpura Mached, Tehsil Amer District Jaipur
20. Hitesh Kumar Morya S/o Shri Ramnarayan Mourya, Aged
About 27 Years, R/o Village Manpura Mached, Tehsil Amer
District Jaipur
21. Nirma Kumari Erma D/o Shri Sagarmal Verma, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Harnath Singh Ki Dhani, Ranoli Sikar
22. Pryanka Khant D/o Surajmasl Khant, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Adarshpura Duduka Tehsil Ghadi District
Banswara
23. Dhannaram S/o Prahald Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Keriya, Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore
24. Kanchan Gahan D/o Brajlal Gahan, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Bara Gaon, Jhunjhunu
25. Leena Damore D/o Shiv Lal Damore, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Village Chundawada, District Dungarpur

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (13 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

26. Hitesh Kumar Chawla S/o Shri Roshan Lal Khatik, Aged
About 26 Years, R/o Village Daulatgarh, Tehsil Asind,
District Bhilwara
27. Bhagwanlal S/o Udairam, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Village And Post Kharpa Kalan, Tehsil Pidawa, District
Jhalawar
28. Rekha Gujrar D/o Mr. Megh Singh Gurjar, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Gurjar Ka Nangla, Sonkhari, Alwar
29. Neha Bhilwara D/o Tekchand Bhilwara, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Village Nareda Kothputli District Jaipur
30. Anjanli Khadiya D/o Shri Shaul Khadiya, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Village Khawadia Post Sundanpur, Kushalgarh,
Banswara
31. Astha Agarwal D/o Purshottam Agarwal, Aged About 25
Years, R/o Ward No.28, Agarwal Nagar, Near Gulkandi
School, Gangapur City, Sawaimadhopur
32. Teena Dindor D/o Fateh Singh Dindor, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Ward No.3, Tadavdla, Kalinjara, Banswara
33. Khushbu Meena D/o Ghanshyam Meena, Aged About 25
Years, R/o 54, Ward No.8, Vrindavan Colony, Aklera,
District Jhalawar
34. Anchal Meena D/o Shri Shyam Manohar Meena, Aged
About 26 Years, R/o 245 K, Patel Bhawan, Godam Ki Talai,
Bheelan Mohalla, Jhalawar
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Ayush, Government Of Rajasthan,
Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan
2. The Director, Directorate Of Ayurved, Ajmer
3. Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved
University, Through Its Registrar Kadwad, Nagaur Road
District Jodhpur
----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Rakh Sharma
Mr. Hanish Khan
Mr. Laxmi Kant Malpura
Mr. R.B. Sharma Ganthola
Mr. Mohar Pal Meena
Mr. Kishan Lal Meena
Ms. Sara Parveen
Mr. Rishabh Khandelwal
Mr. Siddhartha Jain Mutha
Mr. Praveen Sharma
Mr. Neeraj Sharma
Mr. Rajesh Sharma
Mr. Ravi Chirania
Mr. Himanshu Jain

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (14 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

Mr. Ashok Bansal
Mr. Rahish Kumar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.L. Saini, AAG
Mr. Hari Kishan Saini, Dy. GC
Dr. Y.C. Sharma,
Mr. Vishesh Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Judgment

27/07/2023

1. In all these writ petitions, petitioners have raised a similar

grievance in respect of seeking permission to apply/participate in

the recruitment for posts of Ayurvedic Chikitsak, Unani Chikitsak &

Homeopathy Chikitsak, pursuant to different advertisements

bearing No. 02/2023, 03/2023 & 04/2023 respectively, notified by

the respondent-AYUSH Department of Rajasthan, Jaipur. Since

grievance of petitioners are identical in nature, therefore, with

consent of learned counsel for both parties, all writ petitions have

been heard together and would stand decided by this common

Judgment.

2 Respondent-AYUSH Department issued three separate

advertisements, notifying vacancies for posts of Ayurvedic

Chikitsak, Unani Chikitsak & Homeopathy Chikitsak under the

Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homoeopathy and Naturopathy

Service Rules, 1973 (as amended) (hereinafter for short "the

Rules of 1973"). According to advertisements, requisite eligibility

and qualification to apply/participate for posts in question, is the

Bachelor Degree in the respective discipline as much as

registration with the Rajasthan Indian Medicine Board (hereinafter

for short "the Board") and it has been specifically stipulated that

such eligibility should be acquired by aspirants till the last date

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (15 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

appointed under the advertisements to submit online application

form. In respect of internship, it has been indicated that the

internship of aspirants should have been completed till the last

date appointed under the advertisements to fill online application

form. For ready reference, relevant portion of one of the

advertisements, which is substantially similar in all three

advertisements, is being reproduced hereunder:-

शैक्षणषणिक य योगययत्यतााए:त -
1. A Bachelor degree in Ayurved from a University established by
law in India or equivalent and recognized under Indian Medicine
Central Council Act, 1970
न योट:- आवेदक क्यता र्यताजस््यतान इणण्डियन मेण्डिणिसिन ब यो्डिो मड रणजसरेशन रेशन ह योन्यता अणनव्यतायो रेशन है यत््यता णवसयतयतत
आवेदन पत्र / दसयत्यतावेज िसिसतय्यतापन के िसिमय पतज पंजीयन प्रम्यताषणि पत्र प्रसयतपयत करन्यता आवत करना आवशयक रेशन है ।
शैक्षणषणिक अरेशन होयत्यता उक्त पद क की अपेणक्षयत शैक्षणषणिक अरेशन होयत्यता आवेदन करने क की अणनयतम
िसिमबनब पंजी प्र्यतावब्यतान णदन्यतातक यतक अणजो यत य योगययत्यताब्यतार पंजी अअभय्भ्यर्थी आवेदन करने के णे के लिाए प्यतात्र
रेशन ह योग्यता। ्डि . िसिवो पले के लि पंजी र्यताब्यताकतषषणिन र्यताजस््यतान आवयपववयुर्वेद णवश्वणविश्वविद्यताे के लिय,
ज योबपपर मड दसयत्यतावेज िसिसतय्यतापन के िसिमय आवेदन करने क की अणनयतम
णदन्यतातक 10.07.2023 यतक शैक्षणषणिक अरेशन होयत्यता अणजो यत करने क्यता िसिबयत ा देन्यता
रेशन ह योग्यता. अनय््यता वरेशन ह अप्यतात्र रेशन ह योग्यता। अअभय्भ्यर्थी क यो आवेदन करने क की अतणयतम
णदन्यतातक यतक इनटनो णशप रेणनतग भ पंजी पषणि ा ो कर े के लिेन पंजी आवत करना आवशयक रेशन है।

3. All petitioners are stated to be completed the academic

degree course in their respective discipline, however, admittedly

have not completed the internship. The case of petitioners is that

their internship is likely to be completed, in case of few

petitioners, period lacks few days and in case of other petitioners,

period lacks few months. It has been submitted on behalf of

petitioners that the internship period started after completion of

the academic course of Bachelor degree by the University, which

was commenced belatedly, due to pandemic Covid-19 situations

and since the delay occurred in conducting the examinations of

the degree course, consequentially the internship also belated, for

which petitioners are not at fault. Hence, it has been prayed that

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (16 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

the cut off date, determined by respondents in advertisements to

complete the internship as much as to ensure registration by

candidates before the Board up to the last date for submission of

application form, be relaxed and cut off date be extended, at least

up to the stage of documents verification, in respect of the

present recruitment.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners have also referred Rule 37 of

the Rules of 1973, to contend that the power to relax the eligibility

criteria in any peculiar situation rest and vest with the State

Government. Therefore, in such circumstances, the State

Government should exercise its power to relax the Rules in

respect of eligibility to complete the internship, as also in respect

of registration before the Board, and the petitioners who are under

internship be allowed to apply/participate in the recruitment

pursuant to afore-referred advertisements.

5. On behalf of respondent-State, learned Additional Advocate

General, Mr. C.L. Saini and learned Deputy Government Counsel,

Mr. Hari Kishan Saini, have argued that the internship is an

intrinsic and essential part for completion of the bachelor degree

in the advertisements for Ayurvedic Chikitsak, Unani Chikitsak &

Homeopathy Chikitsak, therefore, the candidate who has not

completed his internship, cannot be treated as to acquire the

degree of the respective discipline. Registration before the Board

shall be ensured by the candidates only after acquiring the

degree. Therefore, it has been submitted that none of petitioners

fulfills the required eligibility to apply/participate for the posts in

question for want of degree as well as registration before the

Board. And the eligibility criteria as set forth by respondents in the

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (17 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

advertisements is in the similar lines as envisaged under the

statutory Rules of 1973, therefore, petitioners have rightly been

denied to apply for the posts in question in the present

recruitment.

6. On behalf of respondent-University, learned counsel, Dr. Y.C.

Sharma, urged that legal proposition, in respect of determining

cut off date for eligibility criteria of the candidate, to participate in

the direct recruitment is well established and respondent-State is

well within its power and jurisdiction to determine the cut off date

as last date of submission of online application forms and to which

petitioners have no right to dispute.

7. Heard learned counsel for both the parties at length and

perused the relevant record placed before this Court.

8. At the outset, this is not in dispute that petitioners have not

completed the degree course in their respective discipline of

Ayurved, Unani & Homeopathy, since admittedly the internship of

petitioners is still incomplete. As per Rule 10 of the Rules 1973, as

much as according to the notification dated 28.02.2022, issued by

the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine, the

internship is an intrinsic and mandatory part to acquire the degree

of bachelor course in respect of Ayurvedic Chikitsak, Unani

Chikitsak & Homeopathy Chikitsak. In this view, the eligibility

criteria as envisaged by the respondent-State in the

advertisements, is within parameters as prescribed under the

statutory Rules of 1973, and petitioners, indisputably do not fulfill

the educational requisite qualification till the last date of

submission of application form.

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (18 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

9. The petitioners have sought to take benefits of pandemic

Covid-19 situations, for non-completion of internship, but it is not

case of any petitioner that the period of internship has been

extended due to Covid situation, which otherwise had come under

context by or before March, 2022 when the Apex Court stopped to

extend benefit of limitation. Thus, such plea of the petitioners do

not seems to be bonafide and genuine, for seeking relaxation in

requisite educational qualification to apply for the posts in

question.

10. As far as, the Rule 37 of the Rules 1973 is concerned, on

which learned counsel for petitioners have placed reliance, a

perusal of the such Rule reveals that Government possess power

to relax the Rules, in respect of age and experience but not in

respect of non completion of degree of bachelor course. Therefore,

resort sought to be taken by the learned counsel for petitioners to

Rule 37 of the statutory Rules of 1937, is misplaced as far as

seeking relaxation in respect of completion of the eligibility criteria

of internship is concerned.

11. Learned counsel for respondents has referred a judgment of

a Division Bench in case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Zaiba; DB

Special Appeal Writ No.252/2019 decided on 24.04.2020,

wherein the Divisional Bench, after referring the previous

judgments of the Apex Court, in Para No.24, has held as under:-

"24. Indubitably, the writ petitioners were not holding the
requisite qualification as on the ddate of submission of the
application forms online inasmuch as, at the relevant time,
they were pursuing their internship and had not acquired the
registration with RPMC after completion of the professional
course. Merely because, they were permitted to fill up the
application form, notwithstanding that they were not holding

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (19 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

the requisite qualification as on the date of the submission of
application form online, pursuant to an interim order passed
by this Court, no right is created in their favour. The
requirement of the eligibility qualification as on the date of
the submission of the application form as specified in the
advertisement, cannot be relaxed inasmuch as there is no
provision in the Rules of 1965 permit such relaxation.
Moreover, many more persons who were not having on the
date the qualification as on the date fixed for submission of
the application form but were in position to obtain the
requisite qualification subsequent thereto, might not have
even applied for appointment to the post. That apart, if the
writ petitioners who are not otherwise eligible to apply for
the post, are permitted to participate in the selection process
and stand in merit, other persons who were having the
requisite qualification as on the date of submission of the
application form, may be deprived of the appointment. In the
considered opinion of this Court, the cut-off date fixed for
the eligibility qualification while initiating the recruitment
process needs to the adhered to strictly so as to maintain
transparency and fairness in the recruitment process
undertaken for public employment."

12. Learned AAG has also referred a celebrated judgment of the

Apex Court in case of Bhupinderpal Singh VS. State of Punjab

[(2000) 5 SCC 262], wherein the Apex Court dealt with the

issue in respect of determining the cut off date for eligibility of the

candidate to apply/participate in the direct recruitment for public

employment. While dealing with the issue extensively and after

referring to catena of previous judgments, the Apex Court in Para

No.14 has opined as under:-

"14. In view of several decisions of this Court relied on by
the High Court and referred to hereinabove, it was expected
of the State Government notifying the vacancies to have
clearly laid down and stated the cut-off date by reference to
which the applicants were required to satisfy their eligibility
This was not done. It was pointed out on behalf of the
several d appellant-petitioners before this Court that the
practice prevalent in Punjab has been to determine the
eligibility by reference to the date of interview and there are
innumerable cases wherein such candidates have been

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (20 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

seeking employment as were not eligible on the date of
making the applications or the last date appointed for receipt
of the applications but were in the process of acquiring
eligibility qualifications and did acquire the same by the time
they were called for and appeared at the interview. Several
such persons have been appointed but no one has
challenged their appointments and they have continued to be
in public employment. Such a loose practice, though
prevalent, cannot be allowed to be continued and must be
treated to have been put to an end. The reason is apparent.
The applications made by such candidates as were not
qualified but were in the process of acquiring! eligibility
qualifications would be difficult to be scrutinised and
subjected to the process of approval or elimination and
would only result in creating confusion and uncertainty. Many
would be such applicants who would be called to face
interview but shall have to be returned blank if they failed to
acquire requisite eligibility qualifications by the time of
interview. In our opinion the authorities of the State should
be tied down to the principles 9 governing the cut-off date
for testing the eligibility qualifications on the principles
deducible from the decided cases of this Court and stated
hereinabove which have now to be treated as the settled
service jurisprudence."

The judgment of Bhupinderpal Singh (Supra) has further

been followed in M.A. Murthy Vs. State of Karnataka [(2003)

7 SCC 517], Ashok Kumar Sonkar Vs. Union of India

[(2007) 4 SCC 54] & Alka Ojha Vs. Rajasthan Public

Servicen Commission [AIR 2011 SC 3547].

13. This Court has been informed that the similar issue came up

in SBCWP No.9844/2023; Vaibhav Dangar Vs. State of

Rajasthan, before a Coordinate Bench of this Court at Principal

Seat, Jodhpur, wherein vide order dated 19.07.2023, the

Coordinate bench has dismissed the writ petition with following

findings/observations. The relevant portion of the order dated

19.07.2023 i.e. Para Nos. 11 to 16 is being reproduced as under:-

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)
[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (21 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

"11. A simple look at Rule 19 of the Rules of 1973 which has
been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner

shows that the same is meant for scrutinizing the applications. Simply because the rules provide that the merit shall be prepared on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying examination, it cannot be said that the recruiting agency cannot require completion of internship.

12. Maybe, the petitioner is having mark sheet showing that he has cleared all papers of BAMS, but if Rule 10 which is the relevant provision dealing with the eligibility criteria or requisite qualification is taken into consideration, it is clear that the requirement is, degree in Ayurveda. In the opinion of this Court, a candidate having degree of BAMS is necessarily required to complete his/her internship. Internship is an integral part of BAMS course and unless internship is complete, a person can neither claim himself/herself to have completed BAMS course nor can he be given degree of BAMS.

13. This Court is not much convinced by the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that in the earlier recruitment the candidates were required to furnish internship certificate at the time of document verification. On account of misconception or misreading of law or for whatever reasons, if the respondents had permitted the candidates who were undertaking the internship, the same cannot be claimed as a matter of right and that too when Rule 10 of the Rules of 1973 does not permit so.

14. So far as the interim order dated 14.07.2023 passed by the Jaipur Bench is concerned, a look thereat reveals that the respondents did not join the issue and having put in appearance, they had sought time for filing the reply and thus the order is practically an ex-parte order.

15. Mr. Shrimali, learned counsel for the respondent-State has clarified the stand of the State, as has been noticed hereinabove. Hence, the interim order passed by the Jaipur Bench of this Court is to be ignored, more particularly when this Court has heard the submissions made by rival counsel and decided the issue.

6. The present writ petition is devoid of force and hence, dismissed."

14. In view of the afore-refered judgments and in order to maintain the judicial comity and discipline, this Court has concurrence with the view of the Coordinate Bench expressed in case of Vaibhav Dangar (Supra).

(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM)

[2023:RJ-JP:15493] (22 of 22) [CW-10789/2023]

15. With such observations, this Court is of firm opinion that since petitioners do not possess the requisite qualification on the cut off date as determined by the AYUSH Department, petitioners cannot be permitted to apply/participate in the recruitment for posts in question. The prayer for seeking extension of the cut off date in the present recruitment upto the stage of documents verification, is rejected. As a result, instant writ petitions are failed and the same are here by dismissed.

16. Interim order(s), if any, passed by this Court in favour of any of the writ petitioners, stand(s) vacated automatically.

17. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J SACHIN/187-195, 246-248, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 206, 207, 208, C1-1, C2-1 & C3-1 to C3-6 (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 06:38:06 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur