Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 170 (RAJ)

Hanuman Ram v. State of Rajasthan

2019-01-14

ARUN BHANSALI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to conduct Physical Standard Test / Physical Efficiency Test (PST/PET) of the petitioner. 2. It is inter-alia indicated in the writ petition that pursuant to the Constable Recruitment, 2018, the petitioner participated in the written examination, which was cleared by the petitioner. It is claimed that the PET of the petitioner was scheduled on 13.09.2018, however, he could not participate in the same as he downloaded the admit card on 20.09.2018 by when the PST/PET was already over. It is claimed in the writ petition that certain test was held on 15.10.2018, wherein the other candidate who participated in the same in which one was his friend who have been considered but not the petitioner. and therefore, the petitioner also deserves to be granted opportunity to participate in the PET. 3. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record. 4. A perusal of the record of the petition indicate that admittedly, as per the petitioners representation (Annex.5), PST/PET was scheduled on 13.09.2018, wherein the petitioner failed to appear and made a representation on 12.10.2018 required the respondents to hold his PST/PET on 15.10.2018 and it is claimed that for one of his friend test was held on the said date. The petitioner has failed to disclose the name of his so- called friend whose PET was held on 15.10.2018 and the fact whether he participated in the PET based on some order passed by the Court or he was called for such participation by the respondents. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner was aware of his failure to appear in the PET wayback on 20.09.2018, when he claims to have downloaded his admit card and when he made a representation on 12.10.2018, however, he has now chosen to approach this Court by filing the writ petition on 17.12.2018 and pressing the same after passage of over four months from the date the PET was conducted by the respondents, clearly indicates that the said effort is being made based on absolutely vague averment only by way of an after thought and has no substance. 6. Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed.