Item No. 112, DJ/-
SBCWP NO. 3078/2010
Durga Parihar & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
Order dt: 21st October, 2010
1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
ORDER
S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3078/2010
Durga Parihar & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
DATE OF ORDER ::: 21st October, 2010
PRESENT
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
Mr. A.K. Choudhary, for the petitioners.
Mr. Hemant Choudhary, for the respondents.
—
1. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents brought to the
notice of the Court that original Notification No.1/2009, the
amendment to which on 19/2/2010 has been challenged in the
present writ petition itself has been withdrawn by the State
Government and with its withdrawal the selection process for
teachers for teaching in the school run by Madersa Board has been
cancelled.
3. He also drew the attention of the Court towards the order
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur Bench in
SBCWP No. 4418/2010 (Sunil Kumar Dhakad & Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.) on 6/9/2010) dismissing similar writ petitions as
having become infructuous with the withdrawal of Notification No.
Item No. 112, DJ/-
SBCWP NO. 3078/2010
Durga Parihar & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
Order dt: 21st October, 2010
2/2
1/2009 dated 23/10/2009.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. A.K. Choudhary
submits that such withdrawal of Notification No. 1/2009 is with oblique
motive and respondent State wants to recruit only such candidates,
who have knowledge of ‘Urdu’ language also, whereas, initially in
pursuance of Notification No. 1/2009 the respondent State had
prepared the separate merit list for the class of candidates having no
knowledge of ‘Urdu’ in which present petition stood.
5. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court is of the
view that with the withdrawal of original Notification No. 1/2009, the
subsequent amendment thereto, which was challenged in the present
writ petition, itself goes and the selection process has been cancelled
by the State Government, therefore, the very cause of action to the
petitioners does not survive. No oblique motive can be inferred in
such withdrawal of the initial Notification No. 1/2009.
6. Consequently, in the opinion of this Court, this writ
petition has also become infructuous and same is dismissed as such.
No order as to costs.
(DR. VINEET KOTHARI), J.
DJ/-
112