Chittorgarh (Raj.) v. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government

Ramveer S/o Shrichand, Ward No. 11, Hanuman Bass, Baharpuri, Alwar (Raj.)

18. Gaurav Kumar S/o Kishan Singh, Ward No. 3, Nagla Sogariya, Nadbai, Bharatpur (Raj.) [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (2 of 8) [CW-4721/2022]

19. Balkrishana Prajapati S/o Raj Kumar, Village Bamanpura, Hindauncity, Jagar District Karauli (Raj.)

20. Kuldeep Singh S/o Rampal Singh, Ward No. 4, Tehsil - Nadbai, Paraswara, Bharatpur (Raj.)

21. Lokesh Kumar S/o Hukam Chand, Katariyapura Mangren Khurd, Bharatpur (Raj.)

22. Aastha Goyal D/o Nand Kishore Goyal, Goyal Textile, Ward No. 7, Near Gandhi Park School, Govindgarh, Alwar (Raj.)

23. Ishwar Lal Dhakar S/o Jagdish Chandra, Jawada, Chittorgarh (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3. Director Primary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) Director Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5076/2022

1. Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Bal Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Maliya, Tehsil-Nohar, Post Office Sonari, District Hanumangarh-335523. (Raj.)

2. Suman Hudda D/o Hukama Ram, W/o Bheekhender Kumar, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Derasar, Tehsil Ramsar, Post Office Derasar, District Barmer-344001 (Raj.)

3. Murli Dhar Sharma S/o Shankar Lal Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o 292, Luharo Ka Mohalla, Pratap Nagar, Ganw Danthal, Tehsil Bhilwara, District Bhilwara-311001. (Raj.)

4. Sher Singh Choudhary S/o Shiv Charan Choudhary, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Bihari Ji Ka Mandir, Haldeena, District Alwar-301406 (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (3 of 8) [CW-4721/2022] Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3. Director Primary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) Director Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5077/2022

1. Sonu Kundalwal S/o Sanwar Mal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Kundalwal Sadan, Kumawat Colony, Tehsil Khandela, Gurara, District Sikar-332721 (Raj.)

2. Sanwat Ram Huda S/o Dalu Ram Huda, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Gulasar, Birloka, District Nagour-341025 (Raj.)

3. Mahendra Kumar S/o Lachchha Ram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Rojiya Nadi, Madhasar, Baytoo, Bhopji, District Barmer-344034 (Raj.)

4. Gumna Ram S/o Ladhu Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Rojiya Nadi, Madhasar, Baytoo, District Barmer-344034 (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3. Director Primary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) Director Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5078/2022

1. Pankaj Kumar S/o Shri Sultan Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village 114, Mandir Ke Pass, Maliya, Post Office Sonari Maliya, District Hanumangarh-335523 (Raj.)

2. Sajana Sharma D/o Bhounri Lal Sharma, W/o Ravi Kumar Sharma, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 15, Vijay Nagar, Puranichungi Vijaypura Road, Jamdoli, Luniawas, Jaipur- 302031 (Raj.)

3. Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Hariram Meena, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Post Bidwali Dhani, Talabgaon, Tehsil Lalsot, Post Office Lalsot, District Dausa-303503 (Raj.)

4. Priti Kumari D/o Dalvir Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Braj Nagar, Post Office Bharatpur, District Bharatpur- 321001 (Raj.) [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (4 of 8) [CW-4721/2022]

5. Yogesh Kumari D/o Raj Kumar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Hatheni, Post Office Hatheni, District Bharatpur-321021 (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3. Director Primary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) Director Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5079/2022

1. Prahlad Rai S/o Dharm Pal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Masjid Ka Mohalla, Ward No. 15, Ramgarh, Post Office Ramgarh, District Hanumangarh-335504 (Raj.)

2. Jyoti Choudhary D/o Laxmi Narayan Choudhary. W/o Harendra Jitarwal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Jitarwalo Ki Dhani, Bhadwa, Post Office Bhadwa, District Jaipur- 303328 (Raj.)

3. Divya Choudhary D/o Gordhan Ram Choudhary, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Raychand Pura, Bhojasar, Post Baytu, District Barmer-344034 (Raj.)

4. Divya D/o Govind Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Rojiya Nadi, Madhasar, Post Office Baytu, Barmer-344034 (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3. Director Primary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) Director Secondary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG with Mr. Yash Joshi Ms. Tanisha Pant Mr. Akshit Gupta [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (5 of 8) [CW-4721/2022] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR 27/03/2025 Order In the present batch of the petitions, since common questions are involved, therefore, these writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by the present order, the facts as prayed by both the parties, have been noticed from D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4721/2022 and the prayer made therein is quoted as below:- “1. That the examination REET Level-I for the year 2021 be declared illegal. 2. That the fair inquiry in the matter of mal-practices, irregularities and illegalities by conducted. 3. That the persons responsible for illegalities and irregularities be taken to task as per law. 4. That fair investigation in the entire matter be ordered to be conducted. 5. That any other relief which is in favour of the petitioner may also be passed. 6. That, the cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” The grievance of the petitioners is that the State Government has cancelled the REET-Level-II, Examination on account of some papers being leaked out, whereas, the State Government has not cancelled the REET Level-I, Examination. The allegation made by the petitioners is that if the REET Level-II, Examination has been cancelled on account of cheating or paper- leak, the same treatment should be adopted in REET Level-I, Examination. The respondents have filed the reply and in para No.11 stated as under:- [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (6 of 8) [CW-4721/2022] “That the averments contained in Para No.11 of the writ petition are not admitted. It is submitted that the allegations made by the petitioners in the present writ petition are based on surmises and conjectures only with a view to seek cancellation of REET Level-1 Examination. Merely because keys of double lock were with two different persons who were responsible for leakage of REET Level-II Examination, that cannot be a ground to allege that the paper of REET Level-1 Examination was also leaked. The allegations are absolutely unfounded, baseless and incorrect and mere apprehension that too unfounded cannot be a ground for cancellation of REET Level-I Examination. As far as reference to the complaint of candidates at Agrasen Girls Senior Secondary School, Hinduan City is concerned, it is humbly submitted that the question papers were in multi-layer packing to ensure security. The packing consists of the outer covers; the strings duly fastened by machine; then box; the packets containing question papers placed in the box; the plastic sheets in the packets covering the question papers. The videography of the unloading of the packing, opening of the boxes was conducted at each and every centre. At Agarsen Girls Senior Secondary School where the candidates took their examination, in the investigation it has been confirmed that all the boxes containing the question papers and inner packing including the packets containing the question papers were found to be intact. The videography of the unloading and opening of the packing containing boxes and sealed packets was undertaken and all the boxes and sealed packets were found to be in proper condition. Thereafter, the sealed packets containing question papers were opened in the respective class rooms. In the enquiry, it has been confirmed that all the packets were opened in the presence of the students. All the students were fully satisfied with the packing of the packets and thereafter only the packets were opened. No objection regarding any packet was raised by any student. The seal on the question paper [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (7 of 8) [CW-4721/2022] which is in the form of perforation which was found to be broken at some places could be caused on account of handling of the boxes or even at the time of undertaking perforation of the question paper at the Press where question papers were printed and packed. The place where the complaint has been submitted, the packets containing the question paper were opened in the presence of the students and all the students were satisfied with the packets being intact. Under such circumstances, on account of the fact that at some places, the seals (perforation) of the question paper were found to be broken does not in any manner could be suggestive of the leakage of the question paper. The petitioners have made patently false statement that the complaint pertained to open envelope. As stated above, the question papers were in a packet and all the packets containing the question papers were found duly sealed. The packets were opened only in the presence of the candidates in the respective class rooms. The copy of the complaint submitted by the petitioners does not refer to open envelop, nor it pertains to REET Level-1. It pertains to REET Level-II and in the investigation it has been established that the packet containing the question paper was found to be duly sealed and opened in the presence of the candidates. It is reiterated that question paper of REET Level-l has not been leaked and leakage of question paper of REET Level-II has been found to have taken place only at one place i.e. Shiksha Sankul, Jaipur. It is further submitted that damage of the seal to the question paper is not an evidence or indicative of leakage of the question paper in as much as the outer coverings of all the packing were found to be intact.” We are satisfied with the reply submitted on behalf of the respondents and the petitioners are free to lodge a complaint before the Police so that the proper investigation can be made by the Investigating Agency with regard to paper-leak. [2025:RJ-JP:14155-DB] (8 of 8) [CW-4721/2022] So far as the prayer regarding fair investigation is concerned, we are of the considered view that as and when any FIR is lodged by the petitioners, the Investigating Agency or Police Authorities will act in accordance with law. Thus, we are not inclined to interfere with these writ petitions. With these observations, these writ petitions are hereby dismissed. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Upendra Pratap Singh /104-108