1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.728/2006 (Mohan Lal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) Date of order : 8.5.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. V.R. Choudhary, for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Choudhary, Dy. Govt. Counsel. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction to the respondents to again hold the computer skill test in which the computer knowledge be only tested instead of computer typing speed. The petitioner, who is physically handicapped persons and possessing bachelor's degree in Arts, applied in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the respondent for the post of Banking Assistant. The said advertisement was issued on 14.7.2005. the petitioner was allowed to appear in the written test conducted by respondent Bank in which he was declared passed thereafter the petitioner was called for 2 computer skill test. In the computer skill test, the petitioner was declared failed. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition that as per the qualification laid down for the post of Banking Assistant, the only requirement is that a candidate must possess bachelor degree in his credit, so also he should have knowledge of computer. However, according to the petitioner for assessing the knowledge of computer, the respondents have illegally conducted the skill test in which the petitioner was declared failed because he is disabled persons. According tot he petitioner for the post of Banking Assistant, no skill test was to be conducted and for assessing the knowledge of computer only computer knowledge was to be tested but instead of testing the computer knowledge the test of computer typing speed was conducted, which is illegal. I have perused the advertisement (Annexure- P/5). In para-4 of the said advertisement, there is a procedure laid down for selection in which it is specifically provided that for the purpose of computer knowledge the candidate is required to pass computer test and the said condition mentioned in para 4 of the advertisement is not under challenge and so also with open eyes the petitioner appeared in the computer skill test, which is conducted by the respondents as per para 4 of the advertisement and the petitioner was declared unsuccessful in the said test. Therefore, 3 having declared unsuccessful in the said examination, now the petitioner is asking that the said test was illegally conducted by the respondents. In my opinion, the contention of the petitioner is totally unfounded in view of para-4 of the advertisement in which it is categorically provided that for assessing computer knowledge, the candidate is required to appear in the skill test. Admittedly, the petitioner appeared in the skill test and was declared failed, therefore, in my opinion, there is no force in this writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun