RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Inderjeet Singh, J.
Ambika - Appellant
Versus
Principal Secretary For Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7207/2021
Decided On : 02-08-2021
[WRIT PETITION] - [TEACHER RECRUITMENT] - [The court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner for appointment as a teacher due to a significant delay of five years in challenging the non-selection, emphasizing the principle that courts assist vigilant individuals rather than negligent ones. The court also referenced a similar case but found it inapplicable due to the petitioner's lack of prompt action.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied for the post of IIIrd Grade Teacher following an advertisement in 2012. After the results were declared, the petitioner was not selected and filed a writ petition in 2021, five years after the revised results were issued in 2016.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's delay in filing the writ petition was excessive and that the similar case cited by the petitioner did not support her claim due to the difference in timing and circumstances.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief despite the significant delay in filing the writ petition and the applicability of a similar case decided earlier.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that it would not exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution due to the petitioner's negligence in pursuing her claim in a timely manner.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-
(b) Direct the Respondent No.1 to 5 to pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
(c) Pass any other appropriate order or directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the petitioner and in the interest of justice."
The petitioner, in pursuance to the advertisement dated 24.02.2012 issued by the respondents, applied for the post of IInd Level (Class VI-VIII) IIIrd Grade Teacher. After holding examination, the result of the selected candidates was declared by the respondents on 09.09.2012, thereafter, revised result was also issued by the respondents, according to the petitioner, in the month of August, 2016 and challenging her non-selection even in the revised list, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner in the year 2021, after almost a delay of five years.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar circumstances, the writ petition filed on behalf of the other candidate, namely, Mukesh Kumar Tailor, bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.750/2017 was decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur vide order dated 09.02.2017, whereby following directions were issued:-
b. Thereafter, the candidates as per the ratio of 1:2 of the vacancies available shall be called for the verification of the documents and the appointments shall be given to such like eligible candidates as per their merit equivalent to the vacancies available with the department.
c.This Court is aware that some of the candidates are bound to be left out even though they have got more marks than the last candidate but taking into account the limited number of vacancies, the said candidates shall have to try their luck in the next recruitment process afresh.
d.The said process be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within 06 months from today."
Counsel further submits that the petitioner is entitled for the same relief as has been granted to the candidate Mukesh Kumar Tailor in the judgment (supra).
Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed for the reasons; firstly, after declaring the revised result by the respondents in the year 2016, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition in the year 2021, after a delay of 5 years, secondly, the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the matter of Mukesh Kumar Tailor will not help the petitioner as the courts help the vigilant persons and not the negligent persons. Like the present petitioners as admittedly, the writ petition filed by the similarly situated person-Mukesh Kumar Tailor was decided in year 2017 and the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner after a delay of 4 years of passing of the judgment in the matter of Mukesh Kumar Tailor (supra) and lastly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to exercise the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.
The principle that courts assist vigilant individuals and not negligent ones, particularly in matters of recruitment and appointment, was established.
Courts help vigilant persons and not negligent persons.
Candidates must adhere to procedural timelines to seek judicial relief; failure to do so results in forfeiture of rights to claim benefits from subsequent legal decisions.
Appointments for Grade III Teachers must reflect accurate merit while adhering to court directives on recruitment processes, ensuring transparency and fairness in selections.
Delay and laches bar relief in writ petitions; legal rights must be asserted without unreasonable delay to avoid affecting third-party rights.
The principle of treating similarly situated persons alike is subject to exceptions for delays and acquiescence, disqualifying those who do not timely challenge wrongful actions.
The court considered the principle of timeliness and finality in the context of providing additional marks for selection, especially after the completion of the selection process and the filling of a....
The principle of treating similarly situated individuals alike is subject to exceptions for those who delay their claims, reinforcing the necessity of timely action for judicial relief.
Candidates on a merit list do not have an indefeasible right to appointment if they fail to meet the prescribed cut-off marks, emphasizing the need for fair recruitment processes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.