[2026:RJ-JD:10508]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4898/2026 Saurabh College Of Veterinary Science, Hindaun-Karauli Raod, Village Kheda, Tehsil Hindauncity, District Karauli(Raj). Under The Management Of Rajasthan Delhi Education Society, Aitc Krishna Colony, Bayana Moad, Hindauncity District Karauli(Raj). Through Its Secretary, Mahesh Singh S/o Vijay Singh, Aged 46 Years, Resident Of S-57,24 Sector, Raj Aagan, Nri Colony, Jaipur(Raj).

----Petitioner Versus

1. Animal Husbandry-State, Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Goverment Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

2. The Joint Secretary, Goverment Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur

3. The Director, Goverment Of Rajasthan Pashudhan Bhawan Toank Road, Jaipur

4. Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences, Bikaner ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.S. Kotwani Mr. Chinmoy Shekhar Kotwani Mr. Tushar Thanvi For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Ladrecha Mr. Ravindra Jala Mr. Deepak Suthar Mr. Ajay Kumar Vyas Mr. Jatin Sankhla HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

Order

26/02/2026

1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging advertisement dated 09.01.2026, whereby petitioner-institute has been called upon to submit a fresh application for grant of NOC on the ground that the NOC earlier granted to petitioner on

12.08.2022 was issued pursuant to directions of this Court and was therefore a conditional NOC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a matter of fact, respondents have issued Guidelines-2025 for establishment and operation of Animal Husbandry Diploma Institutes. Referring to a specific clause of said Guidelines, learned counsel stated that Institutes already in operation are not required to submit a fresh application for NOC and fresh application is necessary only in cases where an existing institute seeks increase in seats.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the general instructions (Annexure-14) issued pursuant to said policy dated 09.01.2026, which also do not stipulate any requirement for existing institutes to apply for a fresh NOC.

4. It is submitted that condition so imposed in advertisement dated 09.01.2026 is not only contrary to Guidelines-2025, but also expands the scope of the Guidelines, which cannot be done by way of introducing additional conditions through an advertisement.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that as a matter of fact, a conditional NOC was issued in favour of petitioner in year 2022, which clearly requires that petitioner-

institute will have to apply afresh in the event of change in policy.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent contends that petitioner cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate at the same time and in this regard, places reliance upon judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.N. Gosain v. Yashpal Dhir reported in (1992) 4 SCC 683

7. This Court prima facie finds that petitioner is a running institute in whose favour NOC has already been issued by State Government after completing entire prescribed procedure. Merely because this Court directed that to decide representation of petitioner for expeditious disposal of application for NOC, the same does not, by itself, create a separate class of the petitioner.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents failed to dispute the fact that Guidelines-2025 nowhere requires existing institute to apply afresh for NOC or even to institute to whom NOCs had been issued pursuant to directions of this Court. Such condition for the first time was incorporated in advertisement, which is beyond the terms of Guidelines-2025.

9. Matter requires consideration.

10. Respondents are directed to file their response to present writ petition within four weeks.

11. In the meantime, respondents are directed to permit petitioner – Institute to continue the course in pursuance of the NOC granted in year 2022, without requiring them to apply for fresh NOC under advertisement dated 09.01.2026.

12.