Lokesh Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

It is therefore, most humbly prayed that your Lordship may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and call for and examine

entire record of the case and by an appropriate writ, order and direction

The respondent may kindly be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of LDC under Disable (HI) category in district Alwar and

Dausa looking to the her higher marks then last cut off marks in Disable (HI) Category.

The respondent may further be directed to give relaxation to the petitioner for acquiring the RS-CIT certificate under the provisions of Rule 40(iii)

of Nishakatjaj (Protection of right and Whole Participation) Rule 2011.

Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of

the Petitioner.

Dr.Ganesh Parihar, AAG has submitted that the petitioner has not been found eligible for appointment to the post of LDC in Zila Parishad, Dausa as is

reflected in annexure R-1 i.e. order dated 28.6.2013. He submitted that the petitioner in the circumstances cannot seek documents verification relate

the exercise does to his eligibility to be appointed as LDC in Zila Parishad, Alwar. He submitted that appointments to the post of LDC both in Zila

Parishad, Alwar and Dausa related to a common advertisement with requisite similar eligibility.

Mr.Banwari Lal Sharma counsel for the petitioner has not been able to deny that the petitioner indeed applied for appointment to the post of LDC both

in Zila Parishad Alwar and Dausa. He is also not in a position to deny that vide order dated 28.6.2013 which is annexed with the reply to the petition

as R-1, the petitioner’s candidature for appointment to the post of LDC in Zila Parishad Dausa was rejected for reason of his being found to lack

eligibility. Mr.Banwari Lal Sharma is also not in a position to deny that the eligibility for appointment as LDC both in Zila Parishad Dausa and in Alwar

pursuant to the advertisement of 2013, was identical.

In view of the respective submissions, I am of the considered view that this Court cannot direct the petitioner’s document verification for

consideration of his eligibility for appointment to the post of LDC in Zila Parishad, Alwar, when he has already been found to be ineligible to be

appointed in that capacity for Zila Parishad, Dausa. To pass such an order would entail overlooking the rejection of the petitioner’s candidature for

appointment as LDC in Zila Parishad, Dausa as reflected in the order dated 28.6.2013 referred to above and which is not under challenge for reason

of which it presently partakes finality.

At this stage, Mr.Banwari Lal Sharma, counsel for the petitioner prayed that he be allowed to withdraw the petition with liberty to the petitioner to

take remedies, as advised, against the order dated 28.6.2013 whereby the petitioner’s candidature for appointment as LDC in Zila Parishad,

Dausa was rejected and to also simultaneously challenge non-verification of his documents for appointment to the post of LDC in Zila Parishad Alwar

Resultantly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. The petitioner shall be free to challenge the order dated 28.6.2013 as

also the non-verification of his documents for appointment as LDC in Zila Parishad, Alwar.

The interim order dated 9.10.2017 would, in the circumstances, stand vacated.