Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nikita Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan on 19 December, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8279/2022
Nikita Choudhary D/o Shri Rameshwar Lal Jakhar, Aged About
19 Years, Budsu, Tehsil Makrana, District Nagaur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer.
3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary,
Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura,
Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Bijarnia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinit Sanadhya
Mr. Kunal Upadhyay for Mr. Sunil
Beniwal, AAG
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
19/12/2022
1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed that
her candidature on the post of Patwari be considered as she has
obtained her degree at the time of document verification.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner applied for the post
of Patwari pursuant to recruitment notification dated 17.01.2019.
3. The petitioner appeared before the respondents for
document verification on 15.02.2022 with a degree issued by the
University on 20.11.2021. Her candidature was rejected, as the
degree issued to her was after the date of written examination
which was held on 23.10.2021.
(2 of 3) [CW-8279/2022]
4. Mr. Vikas Bijarnia, learned counsel for the petitioner argued
that the petitioner's candidature could not be rejected merely
because her result was declared after the date of written
examination, particularly when it was none of her fault.
5. While submitting that on the date of document verification,
the petitioner was having degree in her favour, learned counsel
argued that the rejection of petitioner's candidature is arbitrary
and contrary to law.
6. Mr. Vinit Sanadhya, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent - Staff Selection Board argued that the candidates who
were having degree on the date of written examination are
entitled for the recruitment and as per the conditions of the
advertisement, a relaxation has already been given to the the
candidates and no indulgence can now be granted to the
petitioner.
7. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied upon the
judgment dated 11.10.2022, passed by the Jaipur Bench of this
Court in the case of Mahesh Kumar Meena Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14363/2022 and the judgment dated
02.09.2021, passed by this Court in the case of Kusum Paridwal
Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11810/2021.
8. In rejoinder, Mr. Bijarnia, learned counsel for the petitioner
argued that the entire world was under the influence of pandemic
COVID-19 and it was required of the State to give some relaxation
to all the candidates keeping in view that education activities and
examinations were not held for two years.
9. Learned counsel invited Court's attention towards Annex.-9,
the decision taken by the State and prayed that direction identical
ought to have been given in the present recruitment also.
(3 of 3) [CW-8279/2022]
10. In the opinion of this Court, the condition of the
advertisement are sacrosanct and the same should be construed
strictly. That apart, if a relaxation in light of COVID-19 Pandemic
or otherwise is to be given, the same was to be given to all
similarly situated candidates and that too by the State
Government.
11. The petitioner whose candidature has been rejected, cannot
claim a direction to the State to grant relaxation, particularly when
no such prayer was made before the competent authority.
12. In light of the judgment in the case of Mahesh Kumar Meena
and Kusum Paridwal (supra), this Court does not find any merit
and substance in the present case.
13. The writ petition therefore fails.
14. Needless to observe that the dismissal of the writ petition
will not come in petitioner's way, if she chooses to pursue her
cause before the competent authority of the respondents by way
of representation or otherwise for grant of relaxation to her.
15. Stay petition also stands dismissed accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
303-Ramesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
