Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Raj) 2038

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Akil Kureshi, Rekha Borana, JJ.
The State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Ali Aman Elahi & Ors. - Respondents
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 696 of 2021, D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 567 of 2021, D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 580 of 2021 and D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 697 of 2021
Decided On : 11-11-2021

Advocates appeared:
Mr. R.P. Singh, AAG with Mr. Jaivardhan Singh Shekhawat, Mr. Jai Raj Tantia, for the Appellant; Mr. Vigyan Shah with Mr. Akshit Gupta, Mr. Harendra Neel and Ms. Sarah Sharma, for the Respondent.

The Rules of 2017 for sports medal winners only apply to open category events, excluding junior category achievements from eligibility for government appointments.

Headnote:
Eligibility - Sports Medal Winners - Rules of 2017 - The court interpreted the Rules of 2017, concluding that only medal winners in open category events are eligible for government appointments, rejecting claims based on junior category achievements as discriminatory and illogical.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought appointment under the Rules of 2017 as a medal winner in junior category events, claiming eligibility for out-of-turn government jobs. The State authorities denied eligibility based on the distinction between junior and senior categories.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the learned Single Judge erred in interpreting the Rules of 2017, which clearly apply to open category medal winners, and that the petitioner’s achievements in junior categories did not meet the eligibility criteria.
Issues: Whether a sports person winning a medal in Junior Level World Championship is eligible for appointment under the Rules of 2017.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Rules of 2017 explicitly cover only open category medal winners, and the distinction between junior and senior categories is valid and necessary to maintain the integrity of the appointment process.
Result: The appeals are allowed, and the judgment of the learned Single Judge is reversed.

JUDGMENT

1. These appeals arise out of the common judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 15/03/2021 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12343/2020 and connected petitions. Since facts are substantially similar, we may note them from the original writ petition in the case of Manini Kaushik. The petitioner Manini Kaushik had filed the above mentioned writ petition seeking a direction that the respondent State authorities should consider her candidature for out of turn appointment on a State Government post as a medal winner under the Medal Winner Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 2017'). The petitioner had participated in a team event of 10 Meter Air Riffle Women Junior Team in ISSF World Championship, Chanangwon held at South Korea in the year 2018 winning a Gold medal in the event. The petitioner also claimed that in the process of winning Gold medal the team had broken the world record in the junior category. Besides, she had also won a Bronze medal in the Asian Championship 2017 (junior category) in the same event. Since the State authorities did not consider the petitioner eligible for appointment under the said Rules of 2017, she has approached this Court.

2. While granting ad interim relief, the learned Single Judge had directed the authorities to consider the candidature of the petitioner as a medal winner at world championship under category 'A' of the said Rules as amended in the year 2020. In compliance of the directions, the respondent constituted a committee, which considered the case of the petitioner in the meeting held on 16/10/2020 and found that she was ineligible because she had won a medal in junior category and that there is a clear distinction between junior and senior category in the regulations framed by the International Shooting Sports Federation (ISSF), the Federation which controls the game of rifle shooting.

3. While finally disposing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge referred to the provisions contained in the Rules of 2017 and Regulations framed by ISSF and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was wrongly held ineligible for appointment in terms of the said Rules. Perusal of the judgment of the learned Single Judge would show that the petition was allowed primarily on two grounds:-

(i) Firstly the learned single Judge was of the opinion that the ISSF had not drawn distinction between Junior and Senior World Championship. Though not specifically so stated, it would appear that the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that petitioner had won a Gold medal in a team event of open category World Championship.

(ii) Secondly, the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that no such distinction as is sought to be made by the authorities, is to be found in the Rules. Learned Judge has therefore opined that such distinction to deprive a rightful candidate such as the petitioner, is discriminatory.

The State Government had challenged that decision in these appeals. The learned Additional Advocate General raised the following contentions:-

(i) That the Rules of 2017 are clear and would cover only those sports persons who had won the medals in specified open category championship. This would not include junior or sub junior events.

(ii) The leaned Single Judge committed serious error in holding that the petitioner had participated in open category events when clearly they had won medals in junior category.

(iii) Counsel pointed out that under the Rules of 2017, there is no upper limit of number of persons who can be appointed on government posts. Recognizing the junior level events for such appointments would open flood gates and large number of candidates would come forward seeking government jobs out of turn. He therefore submitted that the interpretation adopted by the authorities being reasonable, should have been upheld by the learned Single Judge.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the original petitioner opposed these appeals. His contentions were:-

(i) The rul