Candidates participating in a selection process cannot later challenge its fairness based on dissatisfaction with the outcome.

ORDER :

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:-

“1. The impugned notification i.e. Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-serviceman) Rules, 1988 (Annexure-6) and the notification dated 17.04.2018 (Annexure-7) may kindly be declared ultra vires to the extent these are not specifying for the reservation of Ex-serviceman to the respective category to the extent of 12.5% and the same may be ordered to be accordingly implemented while preparing final select list and issuing appointment order in pursuant to the advertisement dated 05.10.2016 read with the last amended corrigendum dated 23.08.2019 in the interest of justice.

2. The impugned order of appointment dated 07.07.2021 to the extent of the private respondents who have been wrongly given benefits of Ex- serviceman may kindly be quashed and set aside and accordingly the same may be ordered to be revised by way of properly implementing the Ex-serviceman category reservation and accordingly the humble petitioners may be considered for appointment pursuant to the advertisement dated 05.10.2016 read with the last corrigendum dated 23.08.2019 in the interest of justice.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that in pursuance to the advertisement dated 05.10.2016, the petitioners applied for the post of Sub Inspectors. After issuance of appointment order dated 07.07.2021 issued by the respondents to the successful candidates, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing this writ petition. Grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents have not properly implemented the reservation policy with regard to ex-serviceman category person.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents have not given 12.5% reservation categorywise in the selection process. Counsel further submits that the respondents became wise and subsequently issued a notification dated 07.12.2022 in The Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-serviseman) Rules, 1988, whereby now they have provided the categorywise reservation in direct recruitment.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General as well as counsel for the RPSC appearing on behalf of the respondents have opposed the writ petition. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the selection process has already been over after issuance of appointment order in the year 2021 on 07.07.2021. Counsel further submits that the advertisement in question relates to the year 2016 and the petitioners after completion of selection process challenged the same criteria applied for reservation for the ex-serviceman category person. Learned counsel further submits that the selection process has already been completed and now vide notification dated 07.12.2022, the Rules have been suitably amended and they have now provided category-wise reservation for the ex-serviceman in direct recruitment.

5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ashok Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2017) 4 Supreme Court Cases 357 in paras No.13 to 18 has held as under:-

“13. The law on the subject has been crystalized in several decisions of this Court. In Chandra Prakash Tiwari v. Shakuntala Shukla (2002), this Court laid down the principle that when a candidate appears at an examination without objection and is subsequently found to be not successful, a challenge to the process is precluded. The question of entertaining a petition challenging an examination would not arise where a candidate has appeared and participated. He or she cannot subsequently turn around and contend that the process was unfair or that there was a lacuna therein, merely because the result is not palatable. In Union of India Vs. Vinodh Kumar MANU/SC/7926/2007 :(2007) 3 SCC 100, this Court held that:

“18. It is also well settled that those candidates who had taken part, in the selection process knowing fully well the procedure laid down therein were not entitled to ques