HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8253/2021

Yamini Rathore D/o Shri Rakesh Kumar Rathore, Aged About 24

Years, R/o Jai Hind Nagar, Gali No.5, Dungarpur.

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, State Institute Of

Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura,

Jaipur, Through Its Secretary.

2.

The Secretary, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, State

Institute Of Agricultural Management Institute Premises,

Durgapura, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Mahaveer Prasad Pareek

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Vinit Sanadhya

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Judgment

08/07/2021

1.

By way of the present writ petition the petitioner has sought

direction to the respondent No.1 – Rajasthan Staff Selection Board

to change her category.

2.

Facts appertain for the present purposes are that the

petitioner has applied for the post of Investigator, pursuant to the

notification dated 22.01.2019.

3.

According to the petitioner, while submitting the application

form on 30.01.2019, she had inadvertently filled her category to

be Non-TSP.

(2 of 4)

[CW-8253/2021]

4.

The written examinations in relation to the recruitment were

held on 27.12.2020 and the result was declared on 16.06.2021.

5.

After declaration of the result on 21.06.2021, the petitioner

submitted a representation before the respondent – Selection

Board inter alia stating that due to inadvertance she had marked

tick at wrong place, due to which petitioner’s category has been

considered as Non-TSP, whereas the petitioner, as a matter of fact,

hails from TSP area and wanted to submit her application form in

TSP area.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner invited Court’s attention

towards a circular dated 24.03.2021, issued by the Selection

Board and highlighted that the Selection Board itself has decided

to give an opportunity to all the candidates to correct errors in the

application forms, even after the written examinations are held.

And since no such opportunity was given in relation to the

recruitment in question, a direction be issued to permit the

petitioner to change her category.

7.

Mr. Sanadhya, learned counsel for the respondent, opposing

petitioner’s prayer, submitted that the petitioner had consciously

filed her application form in Non-TSP area category to avail

reservation available to OBC category. He argued that petitioner

became wiser only once result of written examination was

declared, that too when she realised that if she had showed her

category as TSP, she would fall in merit.

8.

In relation to the Office order dated 24.03.2021 (Annex.8)

relied upon by the petitioner, Mr. Sanadhya submitted that the

written examinations were held in the month of December, 2020

whereas the petitioner requested for change of her category after

(3 of 4)

[CW-8253/2021]

the result was declared. As such the petitioner cannot take

advantage of office order dated 24.03.2021.

9.

Learned counsel for the respondents, while maintaining that

the Circular cannot be applied retrospectively, submitted that

since the order in question was issued in the month of March,

2021, no window could be opened in relation to subject

advertisement, as the examination had been held 3 months ago.

10.

Heard.

11.

Petitioner’s prayer at the first flush appears to be innocuous.

But if one examines it a bit deeper, possibly a planned strategy

cannot be overruled. It is to be noted that out of the total 62 posts

notified only 6 were earmarked for TSP area, that too there was

only one post for General Female (petitioner being OBC can be

considered for General candidate only), whereas there were three

posts for OBC Female. A rather smart candidate would obviously

stake his/her claim towards more seats.

12.

If the prayer, as made by the petitioner is accepted, all such

candidates would firstly stake their claims towards (more seats) -

in t