IMPORTANT POINT
Innocent appointees of an erroneous evaluation should not be ousted from service, especially when there is no fraud or misrepresentation on their part.

ORDER :

1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming, in sum and substance, the following reliefs :-

i. “the Order dated 08.06.2022 (Annex.-3) passed by the Respondent No.3 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

ii. The respondent may kindly be directed to continue the petitioner on the post of Constable (GD) held by him under the respondent with all consequential benefits;

iii. the order dtd. 01.06.2022 (Annex.4) is also declared illegal.

iv. Any other appropriate writ, order or directions which this Honb’le Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the Petitioner.

v. Writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with costs.”

2. The instant writ petition pertains to the impugned action of the respondents, whereby the petitioner has been sought to be terminated from the post of Constable (GD), after he was duly selected and appointed on the said posts. On such due selection and appointment, the petitioner has accordingly joined his post and also completed the requisite training. Thereafter, the proceedings were held to revise the results/selection list at a belated stage and the cut off marks were also revised. The petitioner could not secure the marks within the cut off limit, and now, he has been sought to be ousted from the employment in question.

3. As per the petitioner, there is nothing on record to show that he secured such appointment by any fraud, suppression, and misrepresentation of any material fact, and therefore, the impugned action of the respondents is highly illegal and arbitrary, thus unsustainable in the eye of law.

4. This Hon’ble Court had passed the following interim order on 22.06.2022 in one of the petitions:-

“Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Constable pursuant to the Advertisement dated 04.12.2019. The petitioner has already been awarded appointment vide order dated 30.07.2021 and she is directed to join the training at P.S. Jawahar Nagar, District Kota City, vide order dated 07.06.2022 issued by the office of Superintendent of Police, Kota City. Learned counsel further submitted that without following principles of natural justice and without affording any opportunity of hearing, the respondents vide order impugned dated 10.06.2022 have removed the petitioner from the service.

Counsel relied upon an interim order passed in an identical matter Alpesh Bariya v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8661/2022).

In view the submissions made, issue notice.

Notices need not be issued as Mr. Kailash Choudhary has put in appearance on behalf of all the respondents.

Meanwhile and till next date, effect and operation of the order dated 10.06.2022 (Annex.-5) qua the petitioner shall remain stayed.

However, the respondents would be at liberty to file appropriate application for vacation of interim order, if so advised.

List the matter on 20.07.2022.”

5. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present matter is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in the case Neeraj Kumari Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8951/2022, decided on 07.12.2023 and other connected matters). The relevant portion of the said order dated 07.12.2023 reads as under:-

“5. Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record of the case alongwith the judgments cited at the Bar.

6. This Court observes that the respondents issued the aforementioned advertisement inviting applications for the posts of Constable (GD) and Constable (Driver). The petitioners are eligible for the said post and the same was applied by them under the respective categories. Thereafter, the respondents conducted the examination for the posts in question and the petitioners cleared the written examination and physical standard test and were declared successful and the name of the petitioners