Point of Law: Sub-clause (vi) of Rule 277A of Rules of 1996 read as Authorized Agency shall prepare category wise select list of candidates declared successful on basis of criteria of selection laid down.

ORDER :

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITIONS NOS. 3874/2022, 16707/2021, 17846/2021

1. The present writ petitions have been filed with a prayer for issuance of waiting list in accordance with Rule 277A of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1996’) and further with a prayer for issuing directions similar to those in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2094/2019 (Kuldeep Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan and Others decided on 25.02.2021).

2. All the three writ petitions pertain to the advertisement dated 11.09.2017 in pursuance to which, the petitioners herein applied for the post of Teacher Gr. III Level 2 although qua different subjects. But the issue involved in the present petitions being common, they are decided vide this common judgment.

3. The facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16707/2021 are being taken into consideration for the purpose of adjudication.

4. Vide revised/amended advertisement dated 11.09.2017, applications for the post of Teacher Gr. III Level II were invited. The said advertisement was issued for total 927 posts. The select list was to be issued on the basis of the marks of graduation and REET Examination with the weightage of 30% and 70% respectively. On 30.01.2018, the first select list was issued and candidates therein were called for document verification. But after document verification, only 37 posts out of the advertised posts were filled up and rest of the posts remained vacant. In the circumstances, several writ petitions were preferred by various candidates with a prayer for publication and operation of the wait/reserve list in pursuance to the proviso to Rule 277A of the Rules of 1996. One of these writ petitions being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17360/2018 (Urmila Devi and Others vs. State of Rajasthan and Others) was disposed of vide order dated 07.01.2019 in terms of the judgment passed in Bhushan Kumar Pandaya Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14505/2018) decided on 25.10.2018. Vide order dated 07.01.2019, the respondent-Department was directed to upload the reserve list in terms of the proviso to Clause (vi) of Rule 227A of the Rules of 1996 on its website within a period of four weeks. Further, the concerned Zila Parishads were directed to act in accordance with the provisions of the said proviso in respect of the remaining vacant seats, if any. The other similar writ petitions were also decided on the same terms and the special appeal being D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 924/2019 (Principal Secretary Education Department (Elementary) and Others vs. Urmila Devi and Others) preferred by the State against the order dated 07.01.2019 was also dismissed vide order dated 07.01.2020. However, while disposing of the Special Appeal, it was directed by the Division Bench that the appellants would operate the wait list only to the extent of the posts vacant as on date.

5. In pursuance to the directions as passed in Urmila Devi’s case (supra), the wait/reserve list was issued and published by the respondent-Department on 14.09.2021. In the said list, names of 874 candidates (equal to the total number of the vacant seats) found place. All 874 candidates who found place in wait/reserve list were called for document verification but however, 381 seats still remained vacant even after the wait/reserve list dated 14.09.2021 having operated. Therefore, the present writ petitions have been preferred for filling up of the said vacant posts with the following submissions:

Firstly, the alleged wait/reserve list dated 14.09.2021 issued by the Department cannot be termed as “Select List” in terms of Rule 277A of the Rules of 1996; secondly, list dated 14.09.2021 cannot be termed to be a wait/reserve list too. It was just a reshuffled result which was issued after taking into consideration the candidates who were found unsuitable after document verification; thirdly, the wait/reserve list could have been issued only qua the seats which remained vacant because of the