HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.72/2022

1.

The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,

Ajmer.

2.

The Deputy Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service

Commission, Ajmer.

----Appellants

Versus

1.

Sangeeta Varhat D/o Rooplal Ji Varhat, Aged About 35

Years, Ward No. 9, Sadiya Fala, Post Sanchiya, District

Dungarpur, Rajasthan.

2.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Department Of

Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur Rajasthan.

3.

Director, Department Secondary Education, Bikaner

Rajasthan.

----Respondents

Connected With

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 97/2021

1.

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary,

Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,

Rajasthan.

2.

Director, Department Of Secondary Education, Bikaner,

Rajasthan.

----Appellants

Versus

1.

Lalita Charpota D/o Meeru Charpota, R/o Rujiya, Post

Chidiyawas, District Banswara, Rajasthan.

2.

Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG

Mr. Rishi Soni

Mr. Dhairyaditya Rathore

Mr. Khet Singh, for RPSC

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Rituraj Singh

(2 of 8)

[SAW-72/2022]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

J U D G M E N T

PRONOUNCED ON

: : :

10/11/2022

RESERVED ON

: : :

11/10/2022

Reportable

BY THE COURT: (PER HON’BLE KULDEEP MATHUR,J.)

The instant intra court appeals involve common question of

law and hence, the same are heard and decided together by this

order.

The question to be adjudicated upon is whether an applicant

who has taken customary divorce is entitled to apply in the

category of ‘Divorcee Female’, without presenting decree of

divorce granted by competent civil court before the cutoff date, as

stipulated in the terms and conditions governing the recruitment

process.

It is pleaded that respondent Nos.1 in the appeals belong to

Scheduled Tribe/Tribal Sub Plan Area and had applied against

advertised posts indicating their categories as ‘Divorcee’. The

respondents however, at the time of document verification were

disqualified on the count that they did not possess a decree of

divorce as on the last date of filing application forms. Being

aggrieved by the non-inclusion of the names in the final select list,

the respondents approached the learned Single Bench seeking a

direction upon the appellants for appointment under ‘Divorcee’

category.

Learned Single Bench allowed the writ petitions holding that

the respondents belong to Scheduled Tribe community and

(3 of 8)

[SAW-72/2022]

therefore, the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are not

applicable upon them in light of Section 2(2) of Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 thus, the condition of submitting divorce decree, issued

by a competent court cannot be fastened upon them. The

appellant-respondents were directed to include the name of the

respondents in the select list on the basis of customary dissolution

of marriage and provide them appointment from the date

candidates lower in merit were granted appointment, if they are

otherwise eligible.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that a

candidate who applies for a particular post under ‘Divorcee’

category must be possessed of a decree of divorcee on the last

date of submission of application form so as to make the

candidate eligible for consideration against the post reserved for

candidate belonging to said category. Learned counsel submitted

that the customary practices for divorce may be prevalent in tribal

communities but that would be confined to social purposes only.

However, in order to claim appointment under questioned

selection process, a candidate would be governed by the terms

and conditions set out for the selection process. Learned counsel

further submitted that the general instructions