CW 255/10 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** 1-Civil Writ Petition No.255/2010 Shakti Singh Chauhan & (12) Ors Versus State & Ors. 2-Civil Writ Petition No.3055/2010 Rajeev Kumar Vyas & (3) Ors Versus State & Ors. 3-Civil Writ Petition No.3112/2010 Deepak Pandya & Vinod Maheshwari Versus State & Ors. 4-Civil Writ Petition No.3294/2010 Chandresh Rawal & (5) Ors Versus State & Ors. 5-Civil Writ Petition No.15750/2009 Sumran Singh Dagur & (2) Ors Versus State & Ors. Date of Order ::: 19/03/10 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Hanuman Choudhary, for petitioners DR. Raj Kumar Sharma, for petitioners-CWP-15750/2009 Mr. SN Kumawat, AAG and for respondent PSC Mr. Ganesh Meena, Govt. Counsel for respondents Grievance of the petitioners is that despite vacancies duly advertised being available with the respondents and their name finds place in the order of merit, still has not been considered for appointment. Counsel submits that issue raised in instant petitions has been examined by this Court vide judgment dt.01/12/09 in Naveen Kr. Sharma & Ors. Vs. State (supra), whereby it has been directed ad infra: “Consequently, all these writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider candidature of petitioners for appointment on the post of Teacher (Primary & Upper Primary Schools) on the basis of their selection made pursuant to advertisement dt.30/10/06 strictly in order of merit as per statement (supra) against available CW 255/10 //2// vacancies other than reserved for TSP area; and in case either of petitioners does not find place in order of merit in respective category for appointment, respondents shall inform each of them about his placement and reasons for which he could not be held eligible for appointment. Compliance be made within two months. No order as to costs.” However, Government Counsel submit that necessary facts have not been made available by petitioners. But this fact could not have been controverted that the petitions relate to process of selection initiated by respondents in pursuance of advertisement dt.30/10/2006 held for the post of Teacher (Primary & Upper Primary Schools) under Rajasthan Panchayatiraj Rules, 1996 (“Rules, 1996”). As regards judgment (supra), it has not been disputed by Government Counsel about controversy being decided by this Court. This Court has already observed that if vacancies are available, the same be filled up in the order of merit. Individual merit of writ petitioners has not been examined by this Court. In the light of what has been observed (supra) in CWP-4728/08, instant writ petitions stand disposed of. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p2/ 255CW2010Mar19-NveenTchrs(5).doc