Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1235 (RAJ)

Anil Bamaniya v. State of Rajasthan

2019-04-25

ARUN BHANSALI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent to conduct the PST/PET of the petitioner pursuant to the Constable recruitment, 2018. 2. It is inter alia indicated in the writ petition that the petitioner participated in the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.5.2018. The result of the written examination was declared vide Annex.4, wherein, the petitioner qualified, however, for the PST/PET, the petitioner did not get any information and as such could not appear and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for getting chance in this regard. 3. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents inter alia indicating that the result was declared on 30.9.2018, which was uploaded on the website on the same day, the admit cards for PST/PET were uploaded on 2.10.2018 and the same was held on 7.10.2018. The mere fact that the petitioner did not download the admit card and failed to participate in the PST/PET is not a reason enough for the respondents to again hold PST/PET for the petitioner and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 5. The petition essentially has been filed on the ground that the petitioner could not appear for PST/PET due to lack of information in time. A perusal of the advertisement (Annex.1) indicates that the entire exercise etc. pertaining to the recruitment i.e. filing of application & uploading of admit cards etc. was to be undertaken online. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner downloaded his admit card for written examination online. The respondents categorically indicated that the admit cards were uploaded on 2.10.2018 for holding the PST/PET on 7.10.2018. As the petitioner failed to download the admit card and appear at the PST/PET on the scheduled date, for the reasons best known to him, he is not entitled to any relief from this Court. Merely because it is claimed that he had no information in this regard is not a reason enough for this Court to interfere with the selection process. 7. In view of the above fact situation, no case for interference is made out. There is no substance in the writ petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed.