Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA, J
Naina Ram S/o Sh. Kishna Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary – Respondent
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, conced
Candidates cannot be penalized for not submitting documents not specified in the original advertisement, ensuring a fair and transparent selection process.
The court affirmed the right of a disabled candidate to be appointed under the PwD category despite administrative errors, emphasizing the need for rectification of such mistakes.
Compliance with specific advertisement requirements is necessary to claim benefits under reserved categories.
Candidates applying under a specific category cannot later claim rights under a different category if they do not meet the eligibility criteria for that category.
The court mandated that the competent authority must objectively consider the petitioner's candidature based on eligibility criteria, ensuring transparency in the selection process.
The court established that the validity of experience certificates is determined by the actual experience possessed by the candidate, rather than the authority issuing the certificate, thereby priori....
The appointment of another individual with similar circumstances does not warrant reconsideration of a petitioner's case if the petitioner's qualifications do not meet the requisite standards.
Identification of posts for disabled persons under Section 32 governs reservation of vacancies. No error found in refusal to appoint petitioner due to lack of appropriate post identification for loco....
Candidates must comply with recruitment advertisement conditions; failure to produce required documents justifies rejection of candidature.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
