Candidates cannot be penalized for not submitting documents not specified in the original advertisement, ensuring a fair and transparent selection process.

Order :

1. Petitioner herein, aspirant to become a Safai Karamchari, inter alia, seeks issuance of an appropriate writ, order and/or direction commanding the respondents to call for the record of entire lottery process qua handicapped candidates and consider his candidature for appointment to the said post pursuant to advertisement dated 13.04.2018.

2. Briefly speaking, the relevant facts as pleaded in the petition are that Respondent No.1 issued an advertisement dated 13.04.2018 for 184 posts of Safai Karamchari, stating that selection would be done through a lottery system. Certain posts were reserved for handicapped candidates. The petitioner, a 45% locomotor-disabled person, applied for the said post in the handicapped category. The lottery results, published online, wherein 62 seats were kept reserved with 22 applications received. All of whom were selected. However, the petitioner's name was missing. He filed an RTI on 04.09.2018. Later, he filed a complaint on the Rajasthan Sampark Portal on 02.10.2018, but no response came forth. Hence, this petition.

3. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and gone through the case record.

4. First and foremost, conceded position herein is that the selection process was to be carried out as per the criteria laid down in the advertisement and the documents to be submitted by the candidates were to be as per the Heading “List of Documents to be Attached with the Application Form”, English translation of which, reads as follows:-

“List of Documents to be Attached with the Application Form:

1. A certified copy of the age-related proof/birth certificate indicating the date of birth.

2. A work experience certificate issued by a competent authority (if applicable).

Explanation: Competent authority refers to the Deputy Commissioner for municipal corporations, the Commissioner/ Executive Officer for municipal councils and municipalities, the head of department for contract employees in central/state government offices (with the contractor’s certificate countersigned by the department head), the office head for autonomous and semi-government institutions and undertakings, and the office head for placement agencies (with the proprietor’s certificate countersigned by the office head).

3. A notarized affidavit in the prescribed format declaring that the applicant has submitted only one application in a single urban body, along with an affidavit stating that the applicant has not had more than two children after June 1, 2002.

4. An original character certificate from two reputable individuals, issued within the last six months, who have known the ap

plicant for at least three years and are not relatives.

5. A certified copy of the caste certificate issued by a competent authority for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/Economically Weaker Section/Other Backward Class/Most Backward Class.

6. A certified copy of the domicile certificate, duly issued by a competent authority, in case the applicant is a resident of Rajasthan.

7. A certified copy of the marriage registration certificate, if married.

8. A certified copy of the death certificate of the husband, in case of widowhood.

9. A certified copy of the proof/certificate of separation or divorce, in case of a dissolved marriage/divorce.

10. A certified copy of relevant certificates for reservation or age relaxation.

11. A postal order/bank demand draft of the prescribed application fee amount.”

A perusal of the above, clearly reveals that qua the work experience all that was required to be given was a certificate by the candidate, which of course, was subject to verification. There was no proforma either mentioned in the said heading and/or even published alongwith the advertisement to be submitted by the candidates.

5. However, it appears that subsequently, the respondents decided to introduce a particular proforma as contained at Annexure-R/2/1 appended with the reply. In para No.2 of the reply following stand has been taken qua the aforesaid pro