Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Babu Singh vs The Rajasthan Public Service ... on 6 July, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10233/2020
Babu Singh S/o Shri Harbir Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Village Biretha, Post Office - Milakpur, Tehsil Bayana, District
Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its
Secretary, Ajmer.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Government Of
Rajasthan, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Mathur
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary
Mr. Khet Singh
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Judgment
06/07/2021
(1) Mr. Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
invited Court's attention towards the amendment brought in the
Rules of 1988 vide notification dated 17.4.2018 and submitted
that by way of Rule 6B, ex-servicemen, who have moved
application for retirement have been permitted to take part in the
recruitment process.
(2) While maintaining that the petitioner, having resigned before
submitting application forms is not only eligible for consideration,
but also entitled to be offered appointment, learned counsel
submitted that in light of circular dated 21.5.2019 (Annex.2)
(2 of 3) [CW-10233/2020]
issued by the Personnel Department of the State Government,
there remains no doubt about petitioner's eligibility. He argued
that petitioner's case is squarely covered by the circular and thus,
a direction be issued to the respondent - RPSC to consider their
candidature in terms of the notification dated 17.4.2018 and
circular dated 21.5.2019.
(3) Mr. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
an additional affidavit has been filed by the petitioner, placing on
record copies of the letters dated 5.8.2020 and 12.4.20212 issued
by the State Government.
(4) He submitted that though petitioner's candidature has been
considered by the respondent-RPSC in view of the interim order
passed by this Court on 19.8.2020, however, for no reason
(perhaps on account of pendency of the present writ petition)
respondent - RPSC has not recommended their name.
(5) Mr. Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-
RPSC argued that though the State Government has issued
circular (Annex.2) dated 21.5.2019, yet doubt(s) regarding
eligibility of the candidates is not yet clear.
(6) In the opinion of this Court, once the State Government itself
has issued a clarificatory circular dated 21.5.2019 and clarified its
stand about the notification dated 17.4.2018, the respondent-
RPSC- a recruiting agency is bound by the same. It cannot take a
contrary view.
(7) The respondent-RPSC is, therefore, directed to consider
petitioner's case in the light of notification dated 17.4.2018 and
circular dated 21.5.2019 and recommend his name, in case he is
eligible according to these notification/circular and meritorious and
otherwise eligible.
(3 of 3) [CW-10233/2020]
(8) If respondent-RPSC is of the view that the petitioner is not
eligible in the light of the notification dated 17.4.2018 and circular
dated 21.5.2019, it shall pass a speaking order under the
intimation to the petitioner, against which, petitioner's right to
take legal remedies shall stand reserved.
(9) Needfull be done within a period of four weeks from today.
(10) The writ petition as well as all pending interlocutory
applications are disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
309-CPGoyal/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
