Selection Committee cannot disqualify candidates based on limited choice preferences; disqualification must align with statutory Recruitment Rules.

ORDER :

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ishan Joshi on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Aditya Pathak on behalf of respondent-State.

2. By way of this petition the petitioner challenges decision of the respondent authority of not continuing with the candidature of the petitioner for selection of schools, inspite of the fact that the petitioner was a candidate who had qualified in the substantive selection.

3. The case of the petitioner being that the petitioner, had applied to the post of Assistant Teacher (Computer), in a selection process, initiated by the respondents for the post in question, vide advertisement dated 25.09.2024. It is the case of the petitioner that name of the petitioner figured at Sr. No. 59 in the provisional merit list no.1 and provisional merit list no.

3.1. It is the case of the petitioner that after the provisional merit list no. 2 was published, the respondent had called for preference of school from the aspiring candidates, and whereas the petitioner had given her preference on 08.06.2025. It appears that thereafter, the petitioner could not access her details on the online portal and whereas vide a communication dated 27.06.2025, the respondent selection committee had inter alia given a list of reasons for which candidatures have been rejected one of them being that the candidate had only given a limited number of choices in her school selection and whereas since the candidate could not be posted to such school therefore the candidate has been removed from the remainder of the selection process.

3.2. It is the case of the petitioner that said issue stands covered by judgement of this Court dated 11.03.2022 in Special Civil Application No. 7401 of 2021 and whereas it is submitted that the law laid down by this Court in the said decision being categorical, it was not open for the respondents, being the same selection committee, to have continued with the same ground for rejection inspite of such a ground now no more being available with the respondents.

4. As against the same, the present petition is vehemently opposed by learned AGP Mr. Mitul Gautam who would submit that the petitioner having not given adequate choices, the respondent no. 2 Board as the selection committee was well justified in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for taking part in the remaining selection process. Learned AGP Mr. Gautam would further submit that the law laid by this Court in the decision refereed to hereinabove, has already been subjected to challenge before Hon’ble Division Bench and whereas it is submitted that the petitioner may not be permitted to rely upon the said judgement. Thus submitting learned AGP would request this Court not to entertain this petition.

5. Considering the submissions made by learned Advocates for the respective sides, it would appear to this Court that the issue as to whether a candidate who is successful in a selection process, could be ousted from the selection process just because the candidate had given limited choices for being posted, has been considered by this Court in the decision referred to hereinabove, in case of Patel Sonambahen Vasantbhai vs. State of Gujarat. Relevant portion of the said judgement, more particularly paragraphs no. 4.2, 4.3, 10.1, 11, 12, 12,1, 12.2, 13, 14, 15, 16,16.1, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24[2] being relevant for the present purpose are reproduced hereinbelow:

“4.2 It is the case of the petitioner that respondent – Gujarat State Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Academic Staff Recruitment Selection Committee, ( hereinafter referred to as