JUDGMENT 1. This special appeal has been preferred by the State claiming the following relief: "It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this special appeal may kindly be allowed and impugned order dated 4.7.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge may kindly be quashed and set aside or pass any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the interest of justice." 2. The appellants underwent a selection process in pursuance of the advertisement dated 07.06.2013 for recruitment on the post of Yunani Nurse Junior Grade/Compounder in OBC Divorcee Category. 3. The dispute arose when the writ petitioner (respondent herein) was selected, but her candidature failed at the time of verification of documents, which resulted into her name not coming in the select list issued on 15.06.2018. 4. Mr. Himanshu Shrimali, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Talaknama of the respondent was suspicious, and thus, she was rightly excluded from the selection process in question. 5. As per learned counsel for the appellants, the main stand of the appellants was that the document submitted by the respondent was not the requisite essential document procured from the court of competent jurisdiction. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, submits that the respondent is residing in Jaipur, and due to heart ailment, is working in a hospital, where her treatment is also going on. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the divorced husband of the respondent is a permanent resident of Bhilwara, and that, there are no children out of the wedlock. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the Talaknama has been disbelieved only on the count of not being a valid decree of the competent court, whereas the issue in question has already been settled in the judgment rendered in Tarannum Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16853/2015 decided at Jaipur Bench on 21.04.2017) and Seema Nasib Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (2008) 4 RajLW 3477 . 9. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16853/2015 decided at Jaipur Bench on 21.04.2017) and Seema Nasib Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (2008) 4 RajLW 3477 . 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the conclusion arrived at by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order is absolutely in accordance with law, as in the case of Seema Nasib (supra) and Tarannum Khan (supra), it has already been laid down that even without a decree of Talaknama (Divorce) from the competent court, the Talaknama would be valid. The Talaknama apparently was there. 10. Though there was some suspicion, but on mere suspicion, the candidature of a person could not have been rejected. If at all there was any genuine doubt, proper conclusion should have been arrived at by the appellants. 11. In light of the aforesaid observations, no interference is called for in the present appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. All pending applications also stand dismissed.