JUDGMENT :

Dinesh Mehta, J.

1. By way of present writ petition, petitioners have challenged the action of the respondents, whereby candidates lower in merit to them have been given appointment, while petitioners have been kept out of the select list.

2. The facts if narrated in a nutshell, are that the respondents invited applications for filling up 1789 posts of ANM on contractual basis vide notification dated 28.01.2016.

3. All the petitioners herein appeared in written examination and having secured 48.015; 80.406; 66.518; 53.569; and 53.569 percentile ranking respectively were called for document verification and the final select list was issued.

4. Mr. Poonia, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioner is not different than the one involved in SBCWP No. 936/2020 (Manisha vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr.) decided by a separate order of even date, wherein following has been held:-

"13. In the opinion of this Court, when a clear direction has been given by this Court in the case of Priyanka Saini (supra), in relation to selfsame recruitment, the respondents were bound to adhere to the directions given in such judgment.

14. It will not be out of place to r