JUDGMENT :

ARUN BHANSALI, J.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against the written examination conducted on 8/12/2019 and 9/12/2019 for promotion from the post of Assistant Sub Inspector to Sub Inspector in Jodhpur Range against the vacancies of the year 2018-2019 and a direction to the respondents to conduct the written examination for promotion as per the syllabus provided under Standing Order No. 14/2017 as per the provisions of Rule 29(2) of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (‘the Rules, 1989’).

2. It is inter alia indicated in the writ petition that the petitioners were initially appointed on the post of Constable and thereafter promoted on the post of Head Constable and Assistant Sub Inspector. By communication dated 22/11/2019 the Inspector General of Police, Jodhpur Range proposed promotion from the post of Assistant Sub Inspector to Sub Inspector against the vacancies of the year 2018-2019 for 37 vacant posts through promotional examination and invited applications from eligible Assistant Sub Inspectors. A list of eligible candidates for participating in the written examination for promotion was issued on 2/12/2019 along with a programme, whereby, the written examination was to be held on 8/12/2019 and 9/12/2019.

3. It is indicated that as per the procedure for appointment by promotion under the Rules, 1989, the relevant Rules are Rule 26 to Rule 31, whereby, the names not exceeding three times the number of vacancies out of senior most eligible members of service is required to be prepared, who have passed Part-I of the qualifying examination specified in Rule 29 by obtaining 40% marks in Parade, Practical and other outdoor test. Whereafter, based on the interview, the list of suitable candidates in order of seniority is required to be prepared. It is further indicated that the qualifying examination for promotion prescribes under Rule 29(2) the syllabus for Part-I examination which is required to be issued by Director General cum Inspector General of Police from time to time.

4. It is claimed that vide Standing Order 14/2017 dated 23/10/2017 (Annex.4) the syllabus for conducting eligibility examination was issued, which provided total 300 marks and divided the same into three parts; (i) Written Examination - 150 marks (ii) Parade and Outdoor test - 75 marks and (iii) Record and interview - 75 marks. The written examination was further divided into three parts of 50 marks each i.e. (i) Law & Procedure (ii) Investigation work and (iii) Behaviour police process. It is alleged that in the question papers (Annex. 5, 6 & 7), which were given on 8th & 9th December, 2019 for the written examination, several questions were out of syllabus. The questions alleged to be out of syllabus have been indicated in para 9, 10 and 11 of the writ petition pertaining to the three papers. Based on the said aspect regarding respondents having asked the questions in written examination which were out of syllabus, it is alleged in the petition that as the questions were asked beyond the prescribed syllabus, the entire written examination has been vitiated and, therefore, the written examination and all subsequent procedures also stand vitiated. Based on the said submissions, prayers, as noticed hereinbefore, have been made.

5. A reply to the writ petition was filed on behalf of the respondent State, wherein, it is claimed that the Standing Order 14/2017 was not the only Standing Order prescribing the syllabus as various Standing Orders with respect to syllabus have been issued including Standing Order 6/97, which is still in force and, therefore, as the questions asked in the written examination were part of the syllabus prescribed by Standing Order 6/97, the plea raised apparently has no substance.

6. Further submissions have been made that the examination in question is eligibility test for promotion and the same is not a competitive examination and, therefore, looking to the nature of work performe