SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Raj) 341

DINESH MEHTA
Dimpal Gurjar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Bharat Shrimali, for the Appellants; Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, for the Respondents

JUDGMENT

1. Concededly, the petitioner has applied as an OBC-NCL category candidate pursuant to the advertisement dated 18.6.2018 issued for the recruitment on the post of Female Health Worker.

2. Inspite of opportunity granted by the State for all the MBC candidates to change/amend their category by the cut off date, the petitioner neglected and did not do the same.

3. It is only after publication of the result, the petitioner realizing that persons having secured lesser marks than her in the MBC category have been given appointment, she has woke up from her slumber and approached this Court.

4. Admittedly, the petitioner does not even have an MBC certificate till today.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioners status as an MBC category candidate is not in dispute and merely because the petitioner has failed to furnish requisite certificate and change her category, her valuable right, cannot be denied. In support of his arguments, learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya Vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Anr. Reported in (2016) 4 SCC 754.

6. Mr. Mehta, learned counsel for the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top