SC refuses to defer Raj SI 2025 recruitment exam, but allows 2021 candidates to appear

Jaipur: Just three days prior to the Rajasthan Sub-Inspector (SI)/Platoon Commander Recruitment Examination 2025, the Supreme Court Thursday refused to postpone the exam but granted interim relief to candidates from the 2021 recruitment seeking age relaxation. The court allowed such candidates to appear provisionally in the 2025 recruitment exam, scheduled for April 5 and 6, while hearing a plea that specifically sought permission to sit for the exam pending a Rajasthan High Court decision.A bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma gave the order on a petition filed by Suraj Mal Meena.The plea sought postponement of the 2025 exam by at least four weeks, arguing that candidates from the 2021 recruitment had became overage and were awaiting a decision from the High Court on age relaxation. Senior advocate P B Suresh and Harendra Neel, appearing for the petitioner, said the HC had not yet delivered its judgment, though hearings concluded on Jan 19."The exam schedule has already been announced, and denying the petitioner an opportunity to appear would cause ‘irreparable prejudice'," Suresh argued.Opposing the plea, state govt's additional advocate general Shiv Mangal Sharma argued that thousands of candidates were set to appear and all logistical arrangements had been completed. "Cancelling or postponing the exam at the last moment would cause administrative chaos and impact public interest," he argued.The Supreme Court agreed and refused to stay or cancel the exam. However, considering the interests of 2021 candidates, it permitted them to appear provisionally."Such participation would be purely temporary, with no equity or rights accruing from it," the court said and further directed that results of these candidates will not be declared until the High Court pronounces its judgment.The 2021 exam was cancelled by the High Court on Aug 28, 2025, due to allegations of paper leak and irregularities. While age relaxation was recommended for affected candidates, no special provision was implemented, leading to fresh litigation.