MOHAN LAL MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT . Issue notice.

(2.) MR . Rishabh Tayal, learned assisting counsel to Mr. R.L. Jangid, learned Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents. Service, as such, is sufficient.

(3.) IN the year 2006, the petitioner preferred an application for admission in the Teachers Training Course conducted by the District Institute for Education and Training. The admission was denied to the petitioner for certain reasons and being aggrieved by the same, he preferred a petition for writ (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6170/2006) before this Court. By order dt. 26.10.2006, the petition for writ aforesaid was admitted for hearing and as an interim measure, the respondents were directed to admit the petitioner provisionally in B.S.T.C. Course - 2006 at the District Institute for Education and Training, Udaipur. In pursuant to the direction aforesaid, the petitioner was admitted to the course concerned and was also allowed to appear in the first year examination of B.S.T.C. On completion of first educational session, his result too was declared and he was permitted to join second year of B.S.T.C. He was also allowed to appear in the second year examination of the course, however, result of the same was not declared due to pendency of the writ petition bearing No. 6170/2006. The writ petition aforesaid came to be dismissed under an order dt. 01.04.2013 as becoming infructuous in view of the fact that the issue involved in that was pertaining to admission of the petitioner in B.S.T.C. in the year 2006. After dismissal of the petition for writ, the respondents are not prepared to declare the result of the petitioner, hence, he has again approached this Court.