RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.
Sangeeta - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Others - Respondent
S.B. C.W.P. No. 198 of 2012.
Decided On : 04-03-2014
APPOINTMENT - FOREST GUARD - OBC RESERVATION - WAITING LIST - TERMINATION OF SERVICES - RIGHT TO APPOINTMENT - [ARTICLE 16(1), 16(4), 341, 342] - Whether the petitioner is entitled to be considered for appointment against the post which is available due to termination of the services of Dhansukh.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, belonging to the OBC category, applied for the post of Forest Guard. She submitted her OBC certificate at the time of the interview, but the respondents did not consider her case under the OBC category as she had not submitted the certificate before the last date of submitting the application form. The petitioner claimed that she was entitled to be considered for appointment against the post which was available due to the termination of the services of Dhansukh, who was appointed against the vacancy of ex-servicemen quota of General category but was later terminated for submitting wrong facts.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner was entitled to be considered for appointment against the post which was available due to the termination of the services of Dhansukh. The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Sat Pal, in which it was held that a waiting list would start to operate only after the posts for which the recruitment is conducted have been completed and that a waiting list would commence to operate when offers of appointment have been issued to those emerging on the top of the merit list.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to be considered for appointment under the OBC category? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to be considered for appointment against the post which is available due to the termination of the services of Dhansukh?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner was entitled to be considered for appointment against the post which was available due to the termination of the services of Dhansukh. The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Sat Pal, in which it was held that a waiting list would start to operate only after the posts for which the recruitment is conducted have been completed and that a waiting list would commence to operate when offers of appointment have been issued to those emerging on the top of the merit list. The court also held that the contention of the respondents with regard to the applicability of the circular issued by the Department of Personnel was not sustainable in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent Department to consider the case of the petitioner for providing appointment on the post of Forest Guard as per her position in the waiting list against the above existing vacancy within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
"11. In view of the factual position noticed hereinabove, the reason indicated by the appellants in declining the claim of the respondent Sat Pal for appointment out of the waiting list is clearly unjustified. A waiting list would start to operate only after the posts for which the recruitment is conducted, have been completed. A waiting list would commence to operate, when offers of appointment have been issued to those emerging on the top of the merit list. The existence of a waiting list, allows room to the appointing authority to fill up vacancies which arise during the subsistence of the waiting l
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.