Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS bunch of writ petitions is preferred by the petitioners having an identical cause of action and praying for a common relief and is thus being decided by this common order.
(3.) THE petitioners herein applied for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade -III in pursuance of an advertisement/notification dated 11.5.2011 in a recruitment process conducted by Panchayati Raj Department for filling up vacancies of the posts of Teacher Grade -III in Primary and Upper Primary Schools. The selection test for both levels was conducted on 2.6.2012 and the result thereof was declared on 25.8.2012. It is undisputed that the petitioners herein were duly selected in the said selection process and were given appointment orders of varying dates. It appears that multiple litigations involving different controversies viz., eligibility of the candidates who had secured below 60% marks in RTET examination, faulty answer keys etc. were filed in the Courts in relation to the above selection process. The lead case in a bunch of writ petitions filed in the below 60% RTET eligibility criterion controversy was Vikas Kumar Agarwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SBCWP No. 13488/2012) which was decided by the Single Bench of this Court on 10.9.2012. The appeals preferred against the said order were decided by the Division Bench on 2.7.2013 and the S.L.P. preferred by the State of Rajasthan against the order passed by the Division Bench is reportedly still pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being S.L.P. No. 23178 -23182/2013. Consequently, the authorities imposed a condition in the appointment orders issued to the petitioners stipulating that their appointments shall remain subject to the final outcome of the litigation.;