Back
2020 Supreme(Raj) 341
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Dinesh Mehta, J.
Dimpal Gurjar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan And Another - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1792 of 2020
Decided On : 18-02-2020
Mr. Bharat Shrimali, for the Appellants; Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, for the Respondents
Failure to furnish the requisite certificate and change the category can result in the dismissal of a petition, and the court may consider previous judgments to determine the outcome.
Headnote:
OBC-NCL - Female Health Worker - The court dismissed the petition of a candidate who applied as an OBC-NCL category candidate but failed to furnish the requisite certificate and change her category, citing a previous judgment where the Supreme Court granted indulgence to a candidate who failed to furnish a caste certificate.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied as an OBC-NCL category candidate for the post of Female Health Worker but failed to furnish the requisite certificate and change her category. After realizing that candidates with lesser marks in the MBC category were appointed, she approached the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner neglected the opportunity to change her category and did not even have an MBC certificate. The court also noted a previous judgment where the Supreme Court granted indulgence to a candidate who failed to furnish a caste certificate.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's failure to furnish the requisite certificate and change her category, and the comparison with a previous judgment where the Supreme Court granted indulgence to a candidate who failed to furnish a caste certificate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court distinguished the facts of the present case from the previous judgment and dismissed the petition following the judgment in a similar case.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition and disposed of the stay application accordingly.
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 respondents at the outset submitted that this Court vide its judgment dated 17.2.2020 rendered in the case of Santosh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP No.1056/2020) has rejected the identical writ petition.
7. Heard.
8. A perusal of the judgment rendered in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (supra) it is revealed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted indulgence to a candidate who failed to furnish caste certificate, whereas in the present case, the petitioner has even failed to stake her claim as an MBC candidate. There is, therefore a clear distinction in the facts involved in the present case vis-a-vis the facts of the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya (supra).
9. Hence, following the judgment rendered in the case of Santosh (supra), this writ petition is also dismissed. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
