Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Amit Jangu vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 August, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7926/2020
Amit Jangu S/o Shri Kumbha Ram Jangu, Aged About 33 Years,
R/o H.no. 113, Amar Singh Colony, Nagaur, District Nagaur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Rthe Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, District
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Jangid
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Khet Singh for
Mr. Tarun Joshi
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Judgment
24/08/2021
I. A. No.01/2021 :
1. Mr. Jangid, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that
the reason for which petitioner's candidature was rejected, has
been held illegal by Division Bench of this Court and the issue
stands decided in petitioner's favour.
2. For the reasons stated, the application seeking early hearing
of the matter is allowed.
3. The matter is taken up for consideration today itself.
SB Civil Writ Petition No.7926/2020 :
(2 of 3) [CW-7926/2020]
1. The brief facts relevant for the present purposes are that
the petitioner has vied for the post of Senior Teacher (Sanskrit),
pursuant to the advertisement dated 09.04.2018.
2. Petitioner's name was initially shown in the list of eligible
candidates called for documents verification.
3. The petitioner appeared in the documents verification,
however, the respondent - Commission did not show his name in
the list of selected candidates.
4. When the petitioner sought information from the
respondents about non-consideration of his candidature, by filing
an application under Right to Information Act, 2005 the
respondent - Commission vide communication dated 16.07.2020
informed that his candidature has been rejected, as he has not
cleared B.Ed. Examination on or before the date of examination
i.e. 02.11.2018.
5. Mr. Jangid, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that
the issue in question has been settled by the Coordinate Bench of
this Court (SB Civil Writ Petition No.8056/2015 : Shobha Mutha
Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors) so also by Division Bench of this
Court (DB Special Appeal Writ No.674/2016 : RPSC Vs. Shobha
Mutha & Ors.) and it has been held that if there are two
examinations in one selection, the relevant date will be the date
on which the subsequent examination was held.
6. Mr. Khet Singh, learned counsel for the respondent -
Commission, is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid position
of facts and law. He, however, submits that the petitioner has not
retired within a period of one year of the date of submitting
application form.
7. Heard.
(3 of 3) [CW-7926/2020]
8. On perusal of the communication dated 16.07.2020, this
Court finds that only reason given is, that petitioner has not
cleared the B.Ed. Examination by 02.11.2018, the date of written
examination.
9. The second ground, which has been raised in the reply, is
not mentioned in the communication dated 16.07.2020.
10. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed.
11. The respondents' action of non-consideration of
petitioner's candidature on the ground that he did not clear B.Ed.
examination by 02.11.2018 is, hereby, quashed.
12. The Commission is directed to recommend petitioner's
name, if he is otherwise eligible and meritorious.
13. The respondent - Commission shall be free to examine
the petitioner's eligibility on all aspects, including the aspect
whether the petitioner can be treated as ex-serviceman or not.
14. The Commission is directed to do the needful preferably
before 30.09.2021.
15. Needless to observe that if the Commission rejects
petitioner's candidature on any ground an intimation to this effect
shall be sent to the petitioner, who will be free to take his legal
remedies against such rejection.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
251-A.Arora/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
