1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6564/2004. : : Ajit Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. : : Date of Order 27.9.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.Pradeep Singh for Mr.Rajveer Sharma for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Sharma, Govt. Counsel for the State. Mr.S.N.Kumawat for RPSC. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer that advertisement dated 18.8.2004 issued by the respondents be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to determine all the vacancies of Music Teacher/Lecturer lying vacant in the different schools and further directed to consider case of the petitioner for appointment on such post. Learned counsel for the respondents in reply to the writ petition submitted that originally two posts were advertised, out of which one was reserved for SC (Female) and other was reserved for ST (Female). The State Government thereafter revised the requisition and a 2 corrigendum was issued on 23.1.2002 according to which two posts each of SC (Female) and ST (Female) were advertised. No application was received for appointment against the posts of ST category, but applications were received only against the post of SC category. Twelve candidates were called and two candidates were selected and their names were sent for appointment. The selection process was completed in the year 2004 itself. Learned counsel for the respondents have however further stated that the process was re-initiated for the certain posts in the year 2006 and in the year 2008 again fresh exercise is about to be undertaken. In view of the fact that appointments have already been made pursuant to the advertisement, which is impugned in the writ petition and that the selected candidates are not impleaded as party, this writ petition cannot be proceeded further inasmuch as the advertisement cannot be now quashed when it has sub-served the purpose and appointments pursuant to the advertisement have been made. The petitioner may again apply as and when the vacancies are determined and advertised by the respondents afresh and if and when he applies, his case shall be considered by the respondents in accordance with law. 3 There is no merit in this writ petition. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid observations. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.16.