JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to accord marks for question No. 98 to the petitioner based on the judgment of the Division Bench Bhunda Ram v. State of Raj. & Ors.: DBSAW No. 922/2018, decided on 12.03.2019. 2. A bare perusal of the judgment in the case of Bhunda Ram (supra) indicates that the Division Bench has confined its judgment to the appellants before it and the said judgment is not of general application. 3. The directions issued by the Division Bench reads as under:- "Hence, with a view to give quitus to the dispute and to give finality to the selections already made, we hold that the adjudication made by us will be confined to the appellants involved in the present appeals only. Their assessment shall be carried out in line with the adjudication made by us in the present appeals. For the sake of convenience, we are setting out the particulars of question(s) cataloging the question(s) and corresponding answer/direction which need to be rechecked: Subject Q. No. Direction Reasons set out in para General Knowledge 8 Delete 1 General Knowledge 84 Option (2) is correct 3 Social Science Group-II Paper-II 21 Option (3) is correct 4 General Knowledge-I 98 Option (2) is correct 9 Sanskrit 104 Option (1) is correct 13 As a result, all the appeals are allowed, as indicated above. Needless to observe that after re-appraisal of their result in the light of the findings given by us, if the appellants march ahead of the last selected candidate, they shall be given appointment, subject of course, to their other eligibilities. The respondent Commission shall carry out the requisite exercise and declare the result of the appellants within a period of three weeks from today." (emphasis supplied) 4. As the Division Bench has directed that the adjudication made by it will be confined to the appellants involved in the appeals before it only and further directions have been given to grant relief in case the appellants march ahead of the last selected candidate i.e. the cut-off has not been disturbed. 5. In view of the fact that the Division Bench has confined its adjudication to the appellants therein, the petitioner cannot seek similar relief as granted in the said judgment. 6. 5. In view of the fact that the Division Bench has confined its adjudication to the appellants therein, the petitioner cannot seek similar relief as granted in the said judgment. 6. In view thereof, no case for interference is made out, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed.