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

2022 Supreme(Raj) 1808

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Sandeep Mehta, Vinod Kumar Bharwani, JJ.
Parul Khurana – Appellant
Versus
High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jodhpur & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 1004 of 2022
Decided On : 19-01-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Rakesh Arora, for the Appellant.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the status of being divorced is imperative for a person to apply in the 'Divorcee Female' category, and the last date of submission of application forms is crucial in determining eligibility.

Headnote:

Divorcee Female - Recruitment Process - Hindu Marriage Act, Section 13B - [Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act] - The court held that for a person to apply in the 'Divorcee Female' category, the status of being divorced was imperative, and the petitioner was not entitled to apply in the said category as she was not a 'Divorced Female' on the last date of submission of application forms. The court cited the case of Ashok Kumar Sonkar vs. Union of India, (2007) 3 SCC 956, to support its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner applied for a recruitment process in the category of Divorcee Female, claiming to have filed for divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the last date of submission of application forms. However, the petitioner did not possess the decree of divorce on the last date of submission of online application form. The court was approached to challenge the rejection of the petitioner's candidature in the Divorcee Female category.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner was not entitled to apply in the Divorcee Female category as she was not a 'Divorced Female' on the last date of submission of application forms. The court also emphasized that the reservation for 'Divorcee Female' category required the status of being divorced, and the petitioner's claim was not supported by the law.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was justified in applying in the category of Divorcee Female without possessing the decree of divorce on the last date of submission of application forms.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the requirement that for a person to apply in the 'Divorcee Female' category, the status of being divorced was imperative, and the petitioner did not meet this requirement.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as being devoid of merit.

JUDGMENT

Mehta, J. - The respondents issued a recruitment notification dated 18.01.2020 inviting applications for recruitment to the post of Stenographer Grade-III (Hindi and English) in the Districts Courts and the District Legal Services Authorities. Reservations were provided for Divorcee category women in this recruitment process. The last date of submission of online application forms was 28.02.2020.

2. The petitioner claims that she was married to one Shri Vikash on 06.07.2018. However, the matrimonial relationship fell out and thus, a customary divorce took place in the Society Panchayat on 17.09.2018 and an agreement was executed on the very same day for terminating the relations between the spouses. An application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed on 12.07.2019 but could not be posted for second motion because of some dispute. The decree of divorce was passed on 13.08.2020. The delay occurred on account of COVID pandemic and the lockdown imposed pursuant thereto. As the application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act had already been filed long before submitting the application form in the recruitment process, the petitioner applied in the category of Divorcee Female. The result of the recruitment in question was declared on 30.06.2021. The petitioner was called for interview and document verification and was declared successful in the category of Divorcee Female. However, the previous result was cancelled and fresh result was declared because of some litigation, etc. The petitioner was again declared successful in the Divorcee Female category in the revised result and was called for interview and document verification vide Notice dated 07.12.2021. The final result was declared on 15.12.2021 wherein, a note was appended that the petitioner did not have the decree of divorce on the last date of submission of online application form i.e. 28.02.2020 and thus, she was not being considering in Divorcee Female category. Thereupon, The petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ petition for assailing the notice dated 15.12.2021 whereby, the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that she did not possess the decree of divorce on the last date of submission of online application form.

3. Shri Rakesh Arora, learned counsel representing the petitioner, vehemently and fervently urged that the respondents were totally unjustified in turning down the petitioner's candidature in the Divorcee Female category because she was already having a customary divorce agreement. As the application for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act had also been filed well before issuance of the recruitment notification but could not be decided because of the prevailing COVID pandemic and hence, the petitioner ought to have been given appointment in the Divorcee Female category as per her merit. He submitted that there was no requirement in the recruitment notification that for applying in the Divorcee category, the aspirant must be holding the divorce decree. As the application had been preferred under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, grant of decree of divorce was a foregone consequence thereof. As a matter of fact, the divorce decree was granted on 13.08.2020 i.e. well before declaration of the result and thus, the impugned notice should be struck down and the respondents be directed to offer appointment to the petitioner as per her merit and performance against the seats reserved for Divorcee Female category.

4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel and, have gone through the material placed on record.

5. The recruitment notification in question, in no uncertain terms, stipulated that the reservation was being offered to "Divorcee Female" category. For a person, applying in the said category, the status of being divorced was imperative. There is nothing in law which can permit a candidate to a

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 Back to top