Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jyotsna Ninama vs The State Of Rajasthan on 16 December, 2022
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
(1 of 3) [CW-11079/2018]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11079/2018
Jyotsna Ninama D/o Shri Ratanlal Ninama, Aged About 31 Years,
R/o Village Garhi Nai Abadi, Post Garhi, District Banswara (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director,
Department Of Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.)
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Banswara (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG
Mr. Deepak Chandak
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
16/12/2022
None present for the petitioner,.
The present writ petition has been filed with the following
prayers:-
"(i) The writ petition preferred by the petitioner may
kindly be allowed with all consequential benefits.
(ii) The respondents ma be directed to consider the
candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the
post of Teacher Grade - III in the category of ST TSP
(deserted women) category on the basis of her merit.
(iii) That the respondents may be directed to appoint
the petitioner with all consequential benefits w.e.f. the
date from which the candidate having lesser marks /
merit is given an appointment and accordingly she may
be given the arrears of salary with interest.
(iv) That the impugned order (Annex.7) whereby the
petitioner is declared ineligible may be quashed and set
aside quo the petitioner."
(2 of 3) [CW-11079/2018]
Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for
the respondents submits that the controversy involved in the
present case is squarely covered by a judgment passed by
Division Bench of this Court in a batch of Special Appeal (Writ) led
by D.B. Special Appeal (writ) No. 72/2022 (The Secretary,
Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer V/s Sangeeta
Varhat & Ors.) and other connected appeals decided on
10.11.2022, wherein, the question adjudicated was "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".
The Hon'ble Division Bench has held as under: -
"We are of the considered opinion that the
requirement of a decree of divorce for a female
candidate to claim reservation against the reserved
quota for divorcee women on the cut off date/on the
last date of submitting application form is sine qua
non and the candidature cannot be considered
against said category in the absence of decree of
divorce issued by the competent court. A custom
cannot be allowed to supersede the terms and
conditions governing the recruitment process. The
terms and conditions of recruitment are framed to
adhere to the mandate enshrined under Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution of India which guarantee
equal opportunities to all citizens for their
advancement in the matter of employment.
Candidates belonging to Scheduled Tribe/Tribal
Sub Plan are not precluded from obtaining decree of
divorce from the competent court having jurisdiction
to decide the matrimonial disputes. Exemption from
presenting decree of divorce, issued by competent
court cannot be sought on the ground of customs
prevalent in their communities. The
customs/practices prevailing in a particular
(3 of 3) [CW-11079/2018]
community cannot be allowed to supplement the
terms and conditions of a recruitment process
involving large number of candidates belonging to
various caste, religion, faith and communities.
In view of aforesaid discussion, the judgment
passed in the case of Sunita Meena (supra) is held
per incuriam since, the judgment was rendered in
ignorance of previous decisions of Hon'ble the Apex
Court and co-ordinate Bench of this Court on the
controversy dealing with the cut off date by reference
to which eligibility requirements must be satisfied by
a candidate seeking public employment.
In the result, the intra court appeals succeed
and are hereby allowed. The order/judgment dated
12.09.2019 and 30.03.2021 under present appeals
are set aside."
In view of the judgment of Division Bench passed in (The
Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer V/s
Sangeeta Varhat & Ors.) (supra) the present writ petition has
no merit and the same is hereby dismissed.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
22-nitin/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
