TATIA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS Court issued notice for final disposal by order dated 26. 3. 2003. The interim order was passed by this Court relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Bahadur Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (1), and the respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of promotion to the post of Addl. Director (Mines) in the meeting which was to be held on the same day i. e. 26. 3. 2003. However, it was ordered that the result be kept in a sealed cover till further orders from this Court. An application for being impleaded as a party on behalf of Shri D. S. Maru was submitted by the learned counsel Shri M. S. Singhvi on 27. 3. 2002. The said application of Shri D. S. Maru was allowed by this Court on 28. 3. 2003 as the learned counsel for the petitioner had no objection in impleading Shri D. S. Maru as party in the writ petition. Another application was filed by Shri A. K. Kothari for being impleaded as party-respondent through his counsel Shri M. S. Singhvi on 31. 3. 2002. On 10. 4. 2003, when counsel for Shri A. K. Kothari raised objection against the continuation of the stay order dated 26. 3. 2003, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner has not sought relief against the applicant Shri A. K. Kothari and Shri A. K. Kothari cannot be impleaded as party respondent despite the fact that because of the interim order in this petition recommendations of D. P. C. were kept in sealed envelope and Shri A. K. Kothari was also candidate whose candidature was considered by the D. P. C. and his fate is also sealed in sealed cover. After considering objection of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts of the case Shri A. K. Kothari was impleaded as a party. The interim order which was passed on 26. 3. 2003 was clarified and modified by order dated 28. 3. 2003 by saying that the petitioner himself sought the relief with respect to the post for General Category only and the petitioner had intention to seek relief for order to keep the result of the D. P. C. in a sealed cover for general category and it was not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It was made clear that the respondent will be free to proceed with the matter of promotion with respect to the post of Addl. Director (Mines) reserved for SC/st candidates and the decision with respect to General Category post may be kept in sealed cover. The learned Addl. Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State submitted an application under Article 226 (3) of the Constitution of India on 4. 4. 2003.
(3.) THE petitioner submitted an application for amendment of the writ petition on 10. 4. 2003 along with the proposed amended writ petition. On 10. 4. 2003, the learned Addl. Advocate General raised serious objection with respect to adjourning the matter in view of the fact that the Division Bench of this Court for this very post declined to grant stay order and there is no justification for extension of the stay order by this Court. The matter was adjourned as the court time was over and fixed today as first case, therefore, this case was listed as first case and heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2306/1999 filed by Shri A. K. Kothari, newly added party respondent, is pending before this Court and, therefore, this petition be heard along with S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2306/1999. The learned counsel for the petitioner even relied upon the order passed by me in entirely different matter Babu Singh Shekhawat & Anr. vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (2), having no relevance with controversy involved in this petition and submitted that since there was similarity of dispute in those two writ petitions, therefore, this Court passed the order to list those two writ petitions together for final disposal. Therefore, similarly, this petition be heard along with writ petition No. 2306/1999 filed by Shri A. K. Kothari. ;