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) 2870

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Inderjeet Singh, J.
Radha Jat – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5799/2022
Decided On : 11-10-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Ram Pratap Saini, Advocate., for the Petitioner

Participation in the selection process without raising objections precludes subsequent challenges. Substantial evidence is required to prove mala fides.

Headnote:

PETITIONER - Selection Process for Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander - Standing Order No.16/2016, Article 226, Videography, Mala Fide, Arbitrariness - (2016) 1 SCC 454, (1976) 3 SCC 585, (1995) 3 SCC 486, (2010) 12 SCC 576, (2013) 11 SCC 309, (2020) 3 SCC 86, (2020) 1 WLC 255 - The court discussed the petitioner's plea for inclusion in the select list for the post of Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander, alleging wrongful exclusion, lack of transparency, and fairness in the selection process. The respondents defended the selection process, citing the constitution of a Board and adherence to the standing order. The court referred to various judgments to establish that participation in the selection process without raising objections precludes subsequent challenges. It also emphasized the need for substantial evidence to prove mala fides and the difficulty in establishing mala fides. The court dismissed the writ petitions based on the previous judgment in Jugal Kishor Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners applied for the post of Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander and alleged wrongful exclusion from the select list after the Physical Efficiency Test (PET). They claimed lack of transparency, fairness, and proper marking in the selection process.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners' participation in the selection process without raising objections precluded subsequent challenges. It emphasized the need for substantial evidence to prove mala fides and dismissed the writ petitions based on the previous judgment in Jugal Kishor Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Issues: Wrongful exclusion from the select list, lack of transparency and fairness in the selection process, mala fide and arbitrariness allegations.

Ratio Decidendi: Participation in the selection process without raising objections precludes subsequent challenges. Substantial evidence is required to prove mala fides.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed based on the previous judgment in Jugal Kishor Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

JUDGMENT

1. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition has been considered and decided by this court in the matter of Jugal Kishor Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5853/2022 along with other connected matters) wherein on 16.08.2022, the following order was passed:-

    "1. These writ petitions since involve common question, hence with consent of the parties, have been heard together and are being decided by the present common order.

    2. As prayed, the facts have been taken into consideration from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5853/2022 and the prayer made therein reads as under:-

    "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may very graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to :

    i) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby, directs the respondents to examine the Chip No.T-42004 of petitioner and thereby give proper marks in the 100 meter race and further call for the Videography recorded during the test of Physical Test which was held 13.02.2022 at Maharana Bhupal Stadium, Chetak Circle, Udaipur and the respondents further directs to declare the separate marks of petitioner of all three events i.e. 100 meter race, Long Jump and Chinning Up of Physical Test for the post of Sub Inspector.

    ii) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby direct the respondents to call the petitioner in the interview process and thereby give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Sub Inspector with all consequential benefits, because the petitioner has completed all three measurement/events.

    iii) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby, the result dated 11.04.2022 may kindly be quashed and set aside and respondents be directed to issue fresh result by including the roll no. of petitioner for the post of Sub Inspector.

    iv) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby, the respondents may kindly be declared illegal by which they have wrongly calculated the marks of the petitioner.

    v) Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.

    vi) Cost of the writ petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioner."

    3. Brief facts of the case are that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 03.02.2021 the petitioners applied for the post of Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander and after being successful in the written examination they were called for the Physical Efficiency Test (hereinafter to be referred as PET) in which all the petitioners appeared, thereafter, the respondents called the successful candidates for the interview but since name of the petitioners did not find place in the select list, hence the petitioners approached this Court by filing present writ petitions.

    4. Counsels for the petitioners submitted that the respondents have wrongly not included their names in the list of successful candidates of PET. Counsels further submitted that videography of all the events of the PET has been done by the respondents and the chips were also provided and the petitioners have also completed the race within the prescribed time which is clear from the chip which shows about their running time as recorded therein. Counsels further submitted that despite having performed better than the other selected candidates, even then, name of the petitioners have not been included in the select list. Counsels further submitted that a news item was also published in the newspaper regarding wrongful selection of the candidates by the respondents. Counsels further submitted that no transparency & fairness has been maintained by the respondents in the selection process. Counsels further submitted that the respondents have failed to separately declare the marks of the petitioners towards Long Jump, 100 Meter Race and Chin

    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