Back
2025 Supreme(Raj) 1961
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
AVNEESH JHINGAN, BHUWAN GOYAL, JJ.
Kartikey S/o Ramchandra – Appellant
Versus
Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur Through Registrar General – Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13803 of 2024
Decided on : 10-07-2025
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Public Employment
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Legal Interpretation - Literal Rule - Court emphasized that the wording in legal provisions must be interpreted in its ordinary meaning; deviations from this, such as interpreting 'must' as 'might', are not permissible unless ambiguity exists. (Paras 14, 15)
(C) Eligibility Criteria - The court reiterated the importance of meeting all stipulated qualifications, including specific speed requirements, for appointment in the absence of which no vested right arises for the candidates even if vacancies exist. (Paras 16, 18)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner applied for the Stenographer position, secured high marks in efficiency tests but couldn't meet the shorthand speed requisite. Appeals for appointment on grounds of marks were addressed.
Findings of Court:
Petitioner failed to pass the necessary shorthand speed test and thus lacked qualification, warranting dismissal of the petition.
Issues: Eligibility of candidates who do not pass the required speed test for Stenographer despite meeting other criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: Court ruled against any alteration of the clear wording of the qualification rule; failing to meet the requisite shorthand speed means the candidate cannot be appointed regardless of other scores.
Result: Petition dismissed.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Shivcharan Gupta
For the Respondent: Mr.Vigyan Shah with Mr.Akshit Gupta
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's observations on evaluation and rules. (Para 1 , 5 , 9 , 11) |
| 2. facts of the petitioner applying for stenographer. (Para 2 , 6) |
| 3. contentions regarding qualifications and vacancies. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. eligibility based on shorthand speed requirement. (Para 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. interpretation of statutory qualifications. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. writ petition is dismissed. (Para 18) |
ORDER :
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
1. This petition is filed seeking directions to appoint the petitioner on the post of Stenographer Grade-III (Hindi) (hereinafter referred to as ‘Stenographer’) in pursuance to the advertisement dated 28.07.2023.
2. The facts are that the advertisement dated 28.07.2023 was issued under the RAJASTHAN DISTRICT COURTS MINISTERIAL ESTABLISHMENT RULES , 1986 (for short ‘1986 Rules’) for recruitment on various posts. The petitioner who is specially abled person applied under the category of physically handicapped (low vision) for the post of Stenographer. The petitioner appeared in the examination, as per result sheet, shorthand speed was 50.167 words per minute (for short ‘WPM’); got 66.667 marks in shorthand; 23.475 for speed and 31 marks in efficiency test. The petitioner was not called for interview for not having requisite speed in hindi shorthand test. The representation was made by the petitioner to the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court with a request to give appointment and after serving a legal notice dated 10.07.2024, the writ petition was filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner had secured more than the qualifying marks in speed and efficiency test and there were no minimum qualifying marks prescribed for hindi shorthand test, the respondent erred in not appointing the petitioner. The contention is that the vacancies reserved for physically handicapped category are still vacant. Further that the merit list was to be prepared considering the marks in hindi shorthand, speed and efficiency test, the petitioner had secured more than minimum required marks and in the absence of any other candidate securing higher marks, the petitioner should have been appointed.
3.1. The argument is that in Rule 10 of 1986 Rules the word ‘must have passed’ be read as ‘might have passed’.
4. As per contra, the respondent is relying upon evaluation of marks in hindi shorthand test which is not equivalent for determination of the speed of shorthand. The mandatory requirement for appointment to the post of Stenographer is to pass speed test at 70 WPM in hindi shorthand but the petitioner failed in test. Reliance is placed upon Rule 10 of the 1986 Rules and Clause 14 of the Advertisement.
5. Before proceeding further, it would be relevant to quote relevant portion of the advertisement and Rule 10 of the 1986 Rules:-
“14- ijh{kk dh Ldhe vkSj ikB~;Øe (Scheme & Syllabus of Examination):-
(1) Competitive Examination for the posts of Stenographers Grade-III/Stenographers Grade-II shall consist of the subject given in two alternative Groups A and B, A candidate shall be required to pass the subject group of the post applied and required to pass Group C compulsorily:-
Group-A
English Shorthand Test:
| S.No. | Paper | Duration | Speed of dictation | Marks |
| 1- | Dictation of passage | 6 Minutes | 80 words per minute | 100 |
| 2- | Transcription and typing of Dictated passage in English on Computer. | 50 Minutes | ------------------------ |
Group-B
Hindi Shorthand Test:
| S.No. | Paper | Duration | Speed of dictation | Marks |
| 1- | Dictation of passage | 6 Minutes | 70 words per minute | 100 |
| 2- | Transcription and typing of Dictated passage in Hindi on Computer. | 50 Minutes | ------------------------ |
Group-C Computer Test:
| S.No. Paper | Duration | Marks | Minimum Marks for SC/ST & PH | Minimum Marks for all other | |
| 1. | Speed Test | 10 Minutes | 50 | 20 | 22.5 |
| 2. | Efficiency Test | 10 Minutes | 50 | 20 | 22.5 |
lk{kkRdkj (INTERVIEW)
lk{kkRdkj gsrq dqy fjfDr;ksa dh la[;k ds cjkcj ojh;rkuqlkj vH;fFkZ;ksa dks cqyk;k tk,xkA lk{kkRdkj ds dksbZ vad ugha gSaA lk{kkRdkj dk ,dek= mn~ns’; dsoy ;g lqfuf’pr djuk gS fd vH;FkhZ bl lhek rd uk gdykrk gks ftlls fd og
