CW 4757/08 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4757/08 Ramphool Jat Versus State & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 16/05/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Rajendra Soni, for petitioner *** Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing order dated 29th January, 2008 [Ann.13] whereby his claim for appointment for the post of Sanskrit Teacher against reserved quota for OBC has been rejected by the respondents holding that in future vacancies the cut-off marks in OBC category was higher than what was secured by petitioner. It appears from the record that petitioner earlier participated for the post of Sanskrit Teacher Gr.III and the Division Bench of this court while dismissing Special Appeal No.835/96 observed that petitioner on the basis of qualification be considered for recruitment to the post of Sanskrit Teacher against future vacancies till statutory rules are amended. Later on, petitioner again approached this court by filing CW No.7766/02 which was decided on 9th October, 2006. While disposing of said writ petition, this court observed that case of petitioner may be considered in the light of observation made by Division Bench afresh and speaking order be passed in regard to his consideration for appointment. Respondents considered candidature of petitioner against the future vacancies in the light of observation made by this court, of which reference has been made supra and taking note thereof, it has been CW 4757/08 [2] observed that against future vacancies advertised vide advertisement Nos.2/2003-04 & 4/2003-04 petitioner secured in OBC category 53.94% of marks, whereas cut-off marks in OBC category against two respective advertisements referred to supra were 69.93% & 68.18%, as such no applicant lower in merit in OBC category was considered for appointment by the respondents. Taking note thereof, his claim for appointment was rejected vide order dated 29th January, 2008. Counsel for petitioner submits that while disposing of special appeal preferred by petitioner it was observed that he was in merit, as such was required to be considered on the basis of his merit once assessed for appointment against future available vacancies. Submission made by counsel is of no substance for the reason that this court while dismissing appeal preferred by him only observed for consideration for appointment against future vacancies. It goes without saying that consideration has to be made on the basis of merit which was determined by the respondents in terms of advertisement in question. It is not the case of petitioner that in both the advertisements, of which reference has been made in the order impugned Ann.13 dated 29th January, 2008 any person lower in order of merit in OBC category was considered for appointment. In absence whereof, this court finds no substance in the writ petition, the same stands dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA4757CW2008 16-5.doc