IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SABINA, MANOJ KUMAR VYAS, JJ.
The State of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Kavita Godara D/o Mahaveer Prasad Godara
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 103 of 2021, In S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8330 of 2020, D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 106 of 2021 In S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8329 of 2020, D. B. Civil Misc. Application No. 1 of 2021, In D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 112 of 2021, In S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8330 of 2020
Decided on : 02-03-2021
Constitution of India, 1950- Article 226 - Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services Combined Competitive (Mains) Examination, 2018 - State and Subordinate Services under Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services (Direct Recruitment by Combined Competitive Examination) Rules, 1999 - Rule 15 - Scheme of Examination, personality and Viva-voce Test - State and Subordinate Services - Minimum qualification - Result - Challenged - Initially, 405 vacancies were advertised in State Services and 575 vacancies were advertised in Subordinate Services - Thereafter, a corrigendum advertisement was issued prescribing revised bifurcation of State and Subordinate Services wherein 421 posts were advertised in State Services and 593 posts were advertised in Subordinate Services making combined total of 1014 vacancies - Held, Learned Single Judge fell in error in directing appellants to lay down common minimum qualifying marks for all categories of candidates in such a manner so as to call at least two times number of candidates against total advertised posts and conduct interviews accordingly - It has been argued by learned Advocate General that in case candidates twice number of vacancies are ordered to be called for interview, then, in-fact, number of candidates required to be called would be 2.5 times of number of vacancies - Learned Advocate General has submitted that about 2010 candidates were required to be called for interview and in case directions of learned Single Judge are to be followed, then 700 more candidates would be required to be called for interview - Writ petitions dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Vide this judgment abovementioned appeals as well as application would be disposed of, as they have arisen out of common order dated 17.12.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. Respondents had filed writ petitions challenging the result dated 09.07.2020 of Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services Combined Competitive (Mains) Examination, 2018.
3. Case of the respondents in the writ petitions, in brief, was that an advertisement dated 02.04.2018 had been issued for recruitment under various State and Subordinate Services under the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services (Direct Recruitment by Combined Competitive Examination) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1999’). Initially, 405 vacancies were advertised in the State Services and 575 vacancies were advertised in Subordinate Services. Thereafter, a corrigendum advertisement dated 01.07.2020 was issued prescribing revised bifurcation of State and Subordinate Services wherein 421 posts were advertised in State Services and 593 posts were advertised in Subordinate Services making combined total of 1014 vacancies. Respondents had applied for the posts under their respective category. The selection process was to take place in three stages. Preliminary examination was conducted for shortlisting the candidates, who were required to appear in the main examination. No weightage was to be given to the candidates vis-à-vis their marks obtained in the preliminary examination. Main examination was based upon objective type questions consisting of four papers with 800 as total marks. Thereafter, the successful candidates were required to appear in the interview, which carried 100 marks. Initially the result of the preliminary examination was declared on 23.10.2018, wherein, cut off for Other Backward Class category was higher than the cut off of General category. The reserved category candidates, who were having more marks than the general category, were allowed to appear in the main examination. Extended result was declared on 13.12.2018 in pursuance to the interim order dated 01.12.2018 passed by this Court in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 24725/2018 titled as Surghan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Another. The impugned result was declared on 09.07.2020, wherein, 1953 candidates had been declared qualified in the main examination in Non-TSP Area, which comes to near about 1.92 times of the number of the vacancies advertised. Thus, for one post less than two candidates had been called for interview. As per Rule 15 of the Rules of 1999, the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’) could prescribe minimum qualifying marks and also such candidates, who would acquire marks over and above the minimum qualifying marks fixed by the Commission, would be eligible to appear in interview. Hence, the impugned result confining the zone of consideration to 1.92 times of the number of vacancies was illegal, arbitrary and unwarranted.
4. Appellants in their reply to the writ petitions averred that the main examination, 2018 result had been declared on 09.07.2020. 2010 candidates had qualified for the interview in the ratio of 1:1.92 against the total 1051 advertises posts for the RAS Examination, 2018. Para 3, 7 and 10 of the reply filed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8330/2020 read as under:
Ashok Kumar Yadav & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others (1985) 4 SCC 417
Chattar Singh & Others Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others
Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hegde v. Mallikarjun Bhavanappa Tirumale AIR 1960 SC 137
Nair Service Society Vs. Dr. T. Beermasthan & Others (2009) 5 SCC 545
Pradeep Kumar Rai & Others Vs. Dinesh Kumar Pandey & Others (2015) 11 SCC 493
Mohinder Sain Garg v. State of Punjab (1991) 1 SCC 662
Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs. State of Haryana (1985) 4 SCC 417
Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission Vs. Baloji Badhavath & Others (2009) 5 SCC 1
Pitta Naveen Kumar v. Raja Narasaiah Zangiti (2006) 10 SCC 261
Kumari N. Vasundara Vs. State of Mysore & Another (1971) 2 SCC 22
S. Jaffer Saheb v. State of A.P. (1985) 2 APLJ 380
D. Stephen Joseph Vs. Union of India & Others (1997) 4 SCC 753
Sarwan Singh Lamba & Others Vs. Union of India & Others (1995) 4 SCC 546
Prakash Chandra Pathak v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1960 SC 195
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.