Back
2025 Supreme(Raj) 2583
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Ashok Kumar Jain, J.
Dr. Balmukund Meena S/o Shri Gopal Lal Meena - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13561 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13536 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13537 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13551 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13569 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13592 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13596 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13608 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13786 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14124 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14268 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14324 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14472 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14542 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14831 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14952 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16400 of 2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17680 of 2024
Decided On : 11-12-2025
For the Petitioner: Mr. S.S. Hora with , Mr. T.C. Sharma and, Mr. Adesh Arora, Mr. Shribhan Giurjar, Mr. Hanuman Singh, Mr. Akhil Simlote with, Mr. Dikshant Jain and, Mr. Ashvini Raj Tanwar, Mr. Raghu Nandan Sharma with, Mr. Abhinav Srivastava,, Mr. Aayush Bishnoi and, Ms. Kritika Rajawat, Mr. H.V. Nandwana, Mr. Avinash Choudhary
For the Respondent: Mr. Archit Bohra, AGC with Mr. Prakhar Jain Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG with Ms. Pooja Sharma, Mr. S.M. Sharma, Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Mr. Vishal Kumar and Mr. Vishnu Fatehpuria Mr. Yuvraj Samant with Mr. Tilak Vaid and Ms. Neha Amola Ms. Harshita Thakral for Mr. Rajesndra Prasad, Sr. Adv., AG Mr. Vishwanath Karan Rathore Ms. Karishma Soni for Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, AGC
The court upheld that outcomes from Supreme Court rulings must apply to pending cases involving similar issues, specifically regarding rights of SC/ST candidates.
Headnote:(A) The Constitution of India - Fundamental Rights - The petitions involve SC/ST candidates and their claims were previously considered by a Division Bench, with an ongoing challenge to that judgment before the Supreme Court. The interim order on the petitions was agreed to be extended for 30 days pending Supreme Court's decision. (Paras 1-8)
(B) Consent Orders - The court disposed of the writ petitions by consensus, determining that the outcomes of the Supreme Court's decision will apply to the present case, allowing for any necessary adjustments based on the Supreme Court's ruling. (Paras 6-7)
Facts of the case:
The case concerns multiple writ petitions filed by SC/ST candidates, with claims previously adjudicated by a Division Bench in a distinct case. The petitioners sought similar considerations, noting that the Division Bench's judgment has been appealed to the Supreme Court.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the petitions to be disposed of in accordance with the Division Bench's findings, subject to the Supreme Court’s future ruling.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the adjudication of rights for SC/ST candidates and the application of a higher court's decisions to these writ petitions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the decision made by the Supreme Court in related matters should guide the determination of the petitions at hand, thereby maintaining consistency in the application of legal principles pertaining to SC/ST rights.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. sc/st candidates' consideration (Para 1) |
| 2. argument about affecting rights and slp implications (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. directive for applying supreme court's decision (Para 7) |
| 4. disposal of writ petitions with directions (Para 8) |
ORDER :
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13561/2024:
1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that matter pertains to SC/ST candidates and same was not considered by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in case referred by the petitioner in their application No.01/2025.
2. Having considered the submissions, the writ petition is detagged from the Bunch and list for further consideration on 19.01.2026.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13536/2024S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13537/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13551/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13569/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13592/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13596/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13608/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13786/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14124/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14268/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14324/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14472/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14542/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14831/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14952/2024, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16400/2024 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17680/2024:
1. Learned AAG and learned counsel for respondent while placing reliance upon order dated 04.11.2025 in DB Special Appeal Writ No.931/2024 titled as Rameshwar Choudhary and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. submits that the issue raised by the petitioners has already been considered by the Hon’ble Division Bench at Principal Seat, Jodhpur after considering order dated 11.09.2024 in SB CWP No. 13295/2025 titled as Rameshwar Choudhary and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., therefore the writ petition be disposed of in accordance with decision of the Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that their case is almost on same and identical footings and they have also agitated the issue which was considered by the Division Bench at Principal Seat, Jodhpur. They further submits that the judgment of Division Bench is challenged before Hon’ble Supreme Court after filing SLP (Civil) , which is likely to heard in the next week.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that the matter requires consideration by this Hon’ble Court as the important rights of petitioners are involved in the writ petitions.
4. Learned AAG and learned counsel for respondents submits that in case a SLP is preferred before Hon’ble Supreme Court and the order in case of Rameshwar Choudhary (supra) passed by Division Bench is modified or set aside or changed then same may be made applicable in respect of the petitioners and even the writ petitions can be disposed of with direction to apply the ratio upon the petitioners.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners suggested that the ratio decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court whether the interim or final is applied upon petitioners herein then these writ petitions be disposed of with consent of the parties. They further submits that interim order, if any passed in the any of the writ petition(s) be extended with consent of the parties. They further submits that the interim order passed in the writ petitions be continued for next date 30 days.
6. Learned counsel for respondents have no objection in case of disposal of these writ petitions on the basis of consent of the counsels of the parties.
7. In view of submissions of learned counsel for parties, these writ petitions are disposed of with consent of the parties in following manner:
(i). These writ petitions are disposed of in terms of order dated 04.11.2025 in DB Special Writ Appeal No.931/2024 titled as Rameshwar Choudhary (supra) subject to any modification by Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP filed by Rameshwar Choudhary and Ors. (supra) to assail
