Veerender Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) THE instant intra -Court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dt. 8th November, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ application preferred by the appellant/petitioner challenging the action of the State/respondents in granting leave to the non -appellant/respondent number 5 (Dr. Karmveer Singh Godara), in view of his admission to D.M. (Nephrology), against one seat reserved for 'in -service candidate'. Briefly, the essential material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised in the intra -Court appeal are: That the appellant/petitioner and non -appellant/respondent number 5 applied for admission to D.M. (Nephrology), against one seat reserved for 'in -service candidate'. The appellant secured 72.5% whereas non -appellant/respondent No. 5 secured 78.5% and as a result, was selected on 23rd July, 2013. The appellant/petitioner projected a challenge to his selection in the writ application stating that since the non -appellant/respondent number 5, had already availed study leave and therefore, he could not be accorded further study leave in the face of Rule 112 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1951', for short). The challenge was also made to grant of leave to the non -appellant/respondent number 5, being against the public interest and contrary to the provisions of Rule 96 as well as Government of Rajasthan's decision below Rule 96, Rule 110, Rule 112 and Rule 119 as well.
(2.) THE learned Single Judge taking into consideration the pleaded facts, materials available on record and the relevant Rules, declined to accede to the relief prayed for by the appellant/petitioner. The learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner vehemently argued that the non -appellant/respondent number 5, having already availed of study leave, is not entitled to be accorded further study leave contrary to the mandate of the Rules. Further, leave either under Rule 96 or any other Rule is not admissible, to fortify his submissions, reliance was placed on the opinion of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Dr. Rajeev Sarwal, : (1999) 9 SCC 240 and Tara Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., : AIR 1975 SC 1478 : (1975) 4 SCC 1986.
(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner and perused the materials available on record as well as the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.;