IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Inderjeet Singh, Ashok Kumar Jain, JJ.
Ajay Meena S/o Sitaram Meena - Petitioners
Vs.
The Rajasthan High Court Johdpur, Through Registrar General - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 12895 of 2024
Decided On : 01-10-2024
Writ - Recruitment - Article 226 - The court discussed the principles of estoppel in challenging selection processes after participation, emphasizing candidates cannot contest procedures post-examination if they did not raise objections during the process.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to be considered for a typewriting test after a corrigendum was issued for SC category candidates, claiming technical faults during their test. They participated in the selection process but later contested its fairness.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were estopped from challenging the selection process as they had participated without objection and signed a satisfaction certificate regarding the equipment used during the test.
Issues: Whether the petitioners could challenge the selection process after participating in it without raising any complaints during the examination.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that candidates who participate in a selection process without objection cannot later contest its fairness, as established by precedent.
Result: The writ petition is dismissed.
ORDER :
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:
(ii) Issue a writ order or direction to the respondent for consider the representation given of the petitioner and to be included in typewriting test on computer as per corrigendum dated 02.06.2024.
(iii) Issue a writ order or direction to the respondent after included in typewriting test on computer as per corrigendum dated 02.06.2024 and after passing of said test petitioners be appointed for the post of System Assistant.
(iv) Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper, be passed in the interest of justice and to grant adequate relief to the humble petitioners.”
2. The respondent(s) issued advertisement dated 18.12.2023 for recruitment to the post of System Assistant, 2023. In pursuant to the said advertisement all petitioners applied for the said post for which written test (first phase) was conducted by the respondent(s) on 03.03.2024. All the petitioners appeared in the said written test and result of the written test was declared by the respondent(s) on 19.03.2024. In the second phase, the type test was held by the respondent(s) on 18.05.2024 in which all petitioners appeared, however, after participating in the written test and type test they submitted representations on various dates i.e. 29.05.2024, 19.06.2024, 30.05.2024 and 05.06.2024 to the respondent(s) for conducting fresh type test on the ground that the respondent(s) have issued a corrigendum on 02.06.2024 for conducting the fresh type test for SC category (women candidates).
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the respondent(s) are going to conduct the type test for SC category (women candidates) and one more chance be given to the petitioners along with those candidates to appear in the type test.
Learned counsel further submits that there were technical faults with the computer and keyboard provided to the petitioners for which they were not responsible and they failed to type the answers properly in the said type test.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent(s) opposed the writ petition and submitted that there is no fault on their part to conduct the type test and after examination all the candidates signed the form with regard to their satisfaction that their peripherals and systems were working properly, more particularly, in para no.5 of the reply it has been submitted on behalf of the respondent(s) as under:
5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent(s) submits that as per instructions uploaded on the official website of the respondent(s) with regard t
Candidates who participate in a selection process without raising objections are estopped from later challenging its fairness.
Candidates participating in a selection process cannot later challenge its fairness or legality.
Candidates participating in a selection process cannot later challenge it based on alleged faults if they did not raise objections during the process.
Candidates must report grievances during exams; failure to do so may bar post-exam relief, establishing that immediate protests are necessary for claims of technical errors.
Candidates participating in a selection process cannot challenge its validity after being declared unsuccessful, as established by the principle of estoppel.
Participating without objection in the selection process bars a candidate from later contesting its fairness; procedural adherence in evaluation is crucial for validity.
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.