IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1867/02 Adarsh Kishore vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of order : 24/11/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri B.L. Gupta for the petitioner. Shri Hemant Gupta, Addl. Govt. Counsel for the respondents. ****** This writ petition has been filed with the prayer that the respondents be directed to select the petitioner on the post of Lab Technician pursuant to the advertisement dated 11.10.2001. The aforesaid advertisement was a short term advertisement whereby 200 posts of Lab. Technician were advertised. The respondents in reply to the writ petition have come out with the plea that while preparing the merit, they have taken average of the marks of secondary examination as well as Lab. Technician course. The petitioner got 78.73% marks in the secondary school examination and 61.33% marks in the Lab. Technician course and the average of two comes to 70.03% marks. His marks were less than the last candidate appointed in the general category. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the criteria adopted by the petitioner is bad in law being contrary to the law and rules. It is evident from records that the selection was made and appointees joined way back in the year 2001 and the criteria of selection has not been challenged by the petitioner till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this fact came to his knowledge for the first time when the reply to the writ petition was filed and copy thereof was supplied to him. But even copy of the reply to the writ petition was supplied on 15.7.2002 to him and till date no steps have been taken by him to make suitable amendment so as to challenge the criteria of selection and impleading those whose selection was likely to be affected . In the absence of such challenge to the criteria, it cannot be accepted that the method of preparation of merit was wrong because this would require a specific examination of that issue by the Court which might affect the selection of others appointed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/