Priyanka Meena Vs Chairman, Rajasthan Public Service Commission

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) 12 Oct 2001 Civil Special Appeal No. 942 of 2001 (2001) 10 RAJ CK 0049
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Civil Special Appeal No. 942 of 2001

Hon'ble Bench

A.R. Lakshmanan, C.J; Rajesh Balia, J

Advocates

Mahesh Sharma, A.A.G, for the Appellant;

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred
  • Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226

Judgement Text

Translate:

Balia, J.

(1). This writ petition is directed against the order dated 24.8.2001 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4186 of 2001 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant was dismissed.

(2). The petitioner-appellant was taking examination for selection to Rajasthan Subordinate Service Combined Competitive Examinations conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission on 22.8.2000. While she was taking examination of Political Science, she was asked to produce her admission card. In the first instance, it was said to be placed under the answer book and ultimately, when it was produced, the Invigilator fond that some pencil written notes were there on the admission card which were relevant to the questions appearing in the question paper. Pursuant to this incident show cause notice was served on the petitioner to explain her conduct and the petitioner submitted her reply stating that since the question paper was distributed with some delay, she wrote some thing on the admission card about the subject. Thus, it is an admitted case of the petitioner that before the question paper was distributed, she was in possession of admission card with written notings relevant to the question paper undertaken by her. In these circumstances, the explanation furnished by the petitioner was not accepted by the respondents and her candidature was cancelled.

(3). In the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner challenged the order dated 6.1.2001 by invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The learned single Judge in the facts and circumstances noted above has not considered it a case in which extra ordinary jurisdiction be invoked. He accordingly dismissed the petition.

(4). Having heard the learned counsel, we find ourselves in agreement with the order dated 24.8.2001 passed by the learned single Judge does not call for any interference in this appeal.

(5). This appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More