No relaxation is permissible for diverting from the terms and conditions of the advertisement, and allowing relaxation beyond the permissible limits would derail the recruitment process.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayers :-

“I) By appropriate writ, order or direction, Respondents may be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Female Health Worker (ANM) with all consequential benefits, as the petitioner has secured more marks than the last cut off OBC Non Creamy Layer Divorce Category, in pursuance of advertisement dated 18.6..2018.

II) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby, the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner under OBC Non Creamy Layer Divorcee Category by considering the Decree of Divorce dated 12.03.2020.

III) By appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, the impugned list of Not selected candidates may kindly be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner and issue fresh list by including the petitioner for appointment on the post of ANM.”

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to divorcee category and she has been allowed decree of divorce from the Competent Court on 12.3.2020 but she is not being allowed selection/ appointment on the post of Health Worker (Female) against the vacancies reserved for divorcee women category, though she is having higher marks than the many of the candidates who have been selected and given appointment.

3. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and also perused the material available on the record.

4. As per the facts of the case, the advertisement was issued by the respondents on 18.6.2018 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for filling up the vacancies of Health Worker (Female) under the Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 (for short ‘the Rules of 1965’). The last date for submitting the application forms was fixed as 23.7.2018.

5. The petitioner submitted the Online application form on 23.7.2018 under the OBC- NCL category mentioning her martial status as ‘married. The petitioner has also enclosed the divorce decree passed on 12.3.2020 by the Family Court, Tonk.

6. The petitioner is claiming consideration of her candidature against the vacancies reserved for divorce women category on the basis of divorce decree dated 12.3.2020. In clause 4 of the advertisement it has been specifically stated that any candidate claiming consideration under the divorcee category has to submit the divorce decree passed by the Competent Court. It has also been specifically mentioned in the advertisement that the eligibility consideration of the candidate has to be made as on the last date of submitting the application form if no other date has been given in the advertisement or in the relevant rules.

7. This Court in the case of Rekha Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (SB Civil Writ Petition No. 18802/2023) decided on 28.11.2023 has observed as under:-

“8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of J&K Public Service Commission vs. Israr Ahmad, reported in (2005) 12 SCC 498, in para 5 has observed as under:-

“5. We have considered the rival contentions advanced by both the parties. The contention of the first Respondent cannot be accepted as he has not applied for the selection as a candidate entitled to get reservation. He did not produce any certificate along with his application. The fact that he has not availed the benefit for the preliminary examination itself is sufficient to treat him as a candidate not entitled to get reservation. He passed the preliminary examination as a general candidate and at the subsequent stage of the main examination he cannot avail the reservation on the ground that he was successful in getting the required certificate only at a later stage. The nature and status of the candidate who was applying for the selection could only be treated alike and once a candidate has chosen to opt for the category to which he is entitled, he cannot later change the status and make fresh claim. The Division Bench was not correct in holding that as a candidate h