Back
2020 Supreme(Raj) 643
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.
Rajesh Kumar Peeploda and Ors.- Appellants
Vs.
State of Rajasthan and Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 8329 and 8330/2020
Decided On : 17-12-2020
For the Appellant :R.N. Mathur, Senior Advocate, Shovit Jhajharia and Vigyan Shah
For the Respondents: S.S. Raghav, AAG and M.F. Baig
The discretion as mentioned in Rule 15 of the Rules of 1999 and available to the Commission, is to be exercised with reference to the scheme of examination. This discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily or whimsically nor can it be exercised for different reservation categories.
Headnote:
RAS & RTS MAINS EXAMINATION, 2018 - RESULT QUASHED - RPSC DIRECTED TO DECLARE RESULT AFRESH BY LAYING DOWN COMMON MINIMUM QUALIFYING MARKS FOR ALL CATEGORIES OF CANDIDATES IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO CALL AT LEAST TWO TIMES THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES AGAINST THE TOTAL POSTS ADVERTISED AND FURTHER CONDUCT THE INTERVIEWS ACCORDINGLY - RPSC TO APPLY RULE 15 AS IT EXISTED PRIOR TO COMING INTO FORCE OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 09/06/2020 FOR THE RAS & RTS MAIN EXAMINATIONS, 2018 AS WELL AS TO THE INTERVIEW AND THE FINAL RESULT SHALL BE DECLARED ACCORDINGLY - NEW RULE BROUGHT INTO FORCE FROM 09/06/2020 IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RULE 15(2) AND THE SCHEDULE TO THE PRESENT RAS & RTS EXAMINATION, 2018.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners prayed to revise the result dated 09/07/2020 of the main examination of RAS and Allied Services Competitive Examination 2018 and to include candidates by increasing the cut-off marks which may bring the competition at least 2.5 times for non-TSP and TSP areas candidates. In the second writ petition, the petitioners challenge the decision of the RPSC while challenging the result dated 09/07/2020 confining the zone of consideration to 1.92 times the number of candidates of RAS and RTS (Mains) Examination 2018 and further pray to prescribe the minimum cutoff marks in respective categories for the purpose of qualifying the candidates in interview which brings the zone of consideration more than two times the number of vacancies and to treat the petitioners eligible for interview if they find place in the final merit list.
Finding of the Court:
The action of the RPSC in declaring cut-off marks category-wise in a manner to call only 1.5 times the candidates (which has come to 1.92) is held to be illegal and is liable to be set aside. Even as per amended Rule, which has been brought into force from 09/06/2020, the qualifying marks were required to be declared for all candidates singularly. However, if persons from SC/ST category are not found to be available, relaxation upto 5% of such qualifying marks has been allowed for them alone. Thus, from the facts as noticed above, it is apparent that the RPSC has not applied the new Rule as amended on 09/06/2020 and the affidavit is misleading. The action of the RPSC in laying down different cut off marks for different categories is thus found to be de-hors the Rule 15 as it existed prior to notification dated 09/06/2020 as well as de-hors the Rule 15(3) and 15(4) as amended and brought into force after notification dated 09/06/2020. Therefore, the action of the RPSC in declaring cut-off marks category-wise in a manner to call only 1.5 times the number of candidates which has come to 1.92 is also held to be illegal and is liable to be set aside.
Issues: Whether the result of the RAS & RTS Mains Examination, 2018 dated 09/07/2020 is valid?
Ratio Decidendi: The discretion as mentioned in Rule 15 of the Rules of 1999 and available to the Commission, is to be exercised with reference to the scheme of examination. This discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily or whimsically nor can it be exercised for different reservation categories. The RPSC in its written submissions has stressed that the discretion as provided under the Rule would be in the nature of policy decision of the RPSC. However, this Court finds that a policy decision cannot be allowed to be changed each year so as to create an indecisive and confusing atmosphere for candidates.
Final Decision: Both the writ petitions succeed and are allowed with following directions: (a) The result of the RAS & RTS Mains Examination, 2018 dated 09/07/2020 is quashed and set aside with further direction to the respondents to declare result of the RAS & RTS Mains Examination, 2018 afresh by laying down a common minimum qualifying marks for all categories of candidates in such a manner as to call at least two times the number of candidates against the total posts advertised and further conduct the interviews accordingly; (b) The RPSC shall apply Rule 15 as it existed prior to coming into force of the notification dated 09/06/2020 for the RAS & RTS Main Examinations, 2018 as well as to the interview and the final result shall be declared accordingly. (c) It is held that the new Rule brought into force from 09/06/2020 is applicable only to the extent of Rule 15(2) and the Schedule to the present RAS & RTS Examination, 2018. The exercise, as above, shall be conducted expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months henceforth.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.
1. Both these writ petitions are being decided by this common judgment as the issues raised in both the writ petitions are identical and the prayer made is also almost similar.
2. In first writ petition, bearing SB Civil Writ Petition No. 8329/2020 (Rajesh Kumar Peeploda & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & anr.), the petitioners have prayed to revise the result dated 09/07/2020 of the main examination of RAS and Allied Services Competitive Examination 2018 and to include candidates by increasing the cut-off marks which may bring the competition at least 2.5 times for non-TSP and TSP areas candidates.
3. In the second writ petition, bearing SB Civil Writ Petition No. 8330/2020 (Kavita Godara & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & anr.), the petitioners challenge the decision of the RPSC while challenging the result dated 09/07/2020 confining the zone of consideration to 1.92 times the number of candidates of RAS and RTS (Mains) Examination 2018 and further pray to prescribe the minimum cutoff marks in respective categories for the purpose of qualifying the candidates in interview which brings the zone of consideration more than two times the number of vacancies and to treat the petitioners eligible for interview if they find place in the final merit list.
4. Reply was filed in both the writ petitions and thereafter an additional affidavit was filed by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) giving additional factual report to which a counter affidavit has been filed by the petitioners in the case of Kavita Godara & Ors. (supra).
5. Arguments were heard at length.
6. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for RPSC handed over a confidential document giving out details of the candidates called for interview on the basis of the result dated 09/07/2020.
7. Written submissions have been filed by learned counsels in both the writ petitions as well as by the learned counsels for the State and RPSC and additional submissions have also been filed by the State Government.
8. For the purpose of deciding the controversy, the pleadings in the case of Kavita Godara (supra) are being taken into consideration as counter affidavit and additional affidavit have been filed in that case and the arguments were advanced on all the aspects.
9. The facts briefly stated are that as per the Rajasthan State & Subordinate Services (Direct Recruitment by Combined Competitive Examinations) Rules, 1999 framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the RPSC issued a detailed advertisement on 02/04/2018 inviting on-line applications for participation in the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services Combined Competitive Examination, 2018 (herein after referred to as 'RAS & RTS Examination, 2018')
The aforesaid advertisement mentions the number of posts which are available in different State Services as well as Subordinate Services and a candidate is required to apply by a single application for all the posts.
Initially, 405 posts were advertised for State Services and 575 posts for Subordinate Services making total 980 posts available for the candidates, however, vide corrigendum dated 01/07/2020, the number of posts were increased and as per the revised bifurcation, 421 posts for State Services and 593 posts for Subordinate Services, were advertised making the total of 1014 vacant posts in State and Subordinate Services available in Non-TSP area. Additionally, 39 posts for TSP Area were also advertised. Thus, the total number of posts advertised in all are 1051.
10. Rule 15 of the Rules of 1999, as it stood when the advertisement was issued, reads as under:-
"15. Scheme of Examination, personality and Viva-voce Test. - The Competitive Examination shall be conducted by the Commission in two stages i.e., preliminary Examination and Main Examination as per the scheme specified in Schedule III. The marks obtained in the preliminary Examination by the candidates, are declared qualified for admission to the Main Examination
