BELA M.TRIVEDI, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has filed the present petition seeking direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated 18.11.14, whereby the RPSC has stated that the correct answer of the question No. 84 of Paper -I of D series against the advertisement dated 6.9.11 was option (3).
(2.) IN the instant case it appears that the petitioner had earlier filed the petition being No. 18065/12 challenging the answer of the aforesaid question by submitting that the correct option for the said question was 4 and not option (3). The relevant question reads as under : - "84. If mother is carrier and father is normal, how many sons will be haemophilic? (1) 100% (2) 75% (3) 50% (4) 25%"
(3.) IN the said petition, the court had passed the following order on 18.11.14: - "Learned counsel submits that controversy involved in the present matter has already been settled by this court in bunch of writ petitions led by Jitendra Kumar Jhalani Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16800/2012, decided on 14th December, 2012. The aforesaid writ petitions were decided after hearing both the parties. Petitioner wants to make a representation to the respondents in the light of the judgment cited above. In view of aforesaid, writ petition is disposed of with liberty as prayed for. In case of representation, respondents are directed to consider and decide the same. If it is covered by the judgment cited above, then to extend the benefits to the petitioner. In case it is not covered, petitioner may be conveyed the same by a speaking order. Stay application as well as misc. application are also disposed of." It is pertinent to note that the selection to the posts of Accountants and Jr. Accountants in question was challenged by one Jitendra Kumar and other petitioners by filing various petitions, in which the court had passed detailed order. The said order is on record as Annex.6. The petitioner had also filed the aforementioned petition and he got that petition disposed of as per the aforementioned order. Accordingly the RPSC has considered the representation of the petitioner and passed the order dated 18.11.14 reiterating that the option (3) was the correct answer to the question No. 84. The said decision has again been challenged by the petitioner by way of present petition.;