Prakash Tatia, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the controversy involved in these writ petitions has already been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 27.1.2010 delivered in SBCWP No. 8497/2008 - Manglaram and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. which was decided with other connected writ petitions. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioners that the present writ petitions may also be decided in the light of the decision dated 27.1.20 10 and same directions may be issued.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the State submitted that there are several objections which are (i) the person who gave birth to child after cut off date and who had two children already is not an eligible candidate, (ii) some of the candidates were lacking experience, (iii) some of the candidates were over age and (iv) some of the candidates claimed benefit on the basis of their experience of working as Prerak. So far as other cases are concerned, the similar directions can be issued in the light of the decision given in judgment dated 27.1.20 10. After the decision in the case of Mangla Ram (supra) the objections raised by the petitioners above have been considered in SBCWP No. 5657/2008 -Shakti Singh Yadav v. State and Ors. and connected 90 matters decided on 8.2.2010 and the writ petitions have been disposed of.
(3.) IN the light of the above, these writ petitions are also disposed of in terms of the following directions and it is made clear that petitioners may be free to submit the representation within the time granted by the judgment dated 27.1.2010: (i) Respondents are directed to first prepare list of writ petitioners whose applications were received by the respondents in respective districts, and who were not called for interview for the reasons that there was summer break resulting in discontinuance of experience for five years, or experience certificate has not been verified, may be called for interview and this exercise be completed within two months; and simultaneously, petitioners may also contact the office of the concerned authority; and (ii) such of petitioners who are not found to be eligible for any other reason, may be assigned and communicated to each of them, to which if he feels aggrieved, will be free to avail of remedy under the law. (iii) After completion of exercise referred to in para (i) &(ii) (supra), further process be initiated for finalizing merit list of respective districts and such petitioners may be considered for appointment if find place in order of merit in their respective district against advertised vacancies including those duly revised by subsequent corrigendum to advertisement dated 31.5.2008, within a period of three months thereafter in accordance with Rules, 2008 and in the light of judgments of this Court (supra). This writ petition is disposed of.;