Kamod Poswal D/O Sardar Singh ... vs The State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2066 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13366/2019
Kamod Poswal D/o Sardar Singh Poshwal, Aged About 20 Years,
R/o Village Sumel Khurd, Post Khuntla, Tehsil Baswa, District
Dausa, Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.      The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary (Home),
        Ministry Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
        Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.      The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Tonk
        Road Jaipur.
3.      The Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Rajasthan,
        Jaipur.
4.      The Dy. Commissioner Of Police (Headquarter), Police
        Commissionerate Jaipur
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.P. Saini.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rupin Kala, Government Counsel, assisted by Mr. P.S. Naruka.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order

08/03/2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

following prayer:-

"It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may very graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to: I. By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, the respondents be directed to call the petitioner for Physical Efficiency Test because she has attained physical fitness to appear in Physical Efficiency Test and she had already submitted the fitness certificate timely with the respondents.

ii. By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, the impugned order dated 26.7.2019 be declared illegal and same be quashed and set aside.

Iii. By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, the respondent be directed to consider the

(2 of 5) [CW-13366/2019]

fitness certificate of the petitioner and thereby allow the petitioner to appear in the Physical Efficiency Test for selection on the post of Constable.

iv. By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, the respondents be directed not to cancel the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Constable-2018.

v. Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner. vi. Cost of the writ petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioner."

In the first round of litigation, the petitioner approached this

Court by filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19949/2018 which was

disposed of by this court vide order dated 07.09.2018. The order

dated 07.09.2018 reads as under:-

"Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. G. S. Gill who is present in the court, is requested to accept notice on behalf of the respondents.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in this writ petition is covered by a judgment passed by a coordinate bench of this court in the matter of Anita Kumari Vs. State of Rajasthan and others S.B. Civil Writ petition No. 2150/2014 decided on 20.02.2014, wherein it has been held as under:-

""Issue notice. Shri Inderjeet Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, who is present in court, accepts notice on behalf of the State. A copy of the petition has been furnished to him in the court itself. Contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that though petitioner was selected for appointment on the post of Constable but the respondents have required the petitioner to appear for the physical fitness test on 21/02/2014. He has referred in this regard to the letter of the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara dated 11/02/2014. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is presently carrying a pregnancy and due date of delivery

(3 of 5) [CW-13366/2019]

has been indicated by the doctors on 21/09/2014. In this situation, she cannot cope up with the vigorous requirement of the physical fitness test on the date indicated in the letter of the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara.

Shri Inderjeet Singh, learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that petitioner should approach the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara for this grievance and he may consider extending the date of physical fitness test. In the facts of this case, petitioner is required to approach the Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara along with copy of this order, who may consider postponing the date of physical fitness test to a date on which she can be asked for the physical fitness test some time in the month of November 2014 considering that petitioner is due to deliver a baby in the last week of the month of September 2014 and pass appropriate order on representation of petitioner within four weeks. With that direction, writ petition is disposed of."

Mr. G. S. Gill, AAG has not disputed the judgment passed by this court in the matter of Anita Kumari (supra). In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of in view of the judgment passed by a coordinate bench of this court in the matter of Anita Kumari (supra)."

It reveals from the above order that this Court directed the

respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and

pass appropriate orders fixing the date of physical efficiency test

within a period of four weeks. In compliance of the order dated

07.09.2018, the petitioner approached the respondents and

submitted the representation for fixing the date of physical

efficiency test on 04.10.2018, which was duly received by the

respondents, however, no order was passed by the respondents

within four weeks and again the petitioner submitted the

(4 of 5) [CW-13366/2019]

representation to the respondents for holding physical efficiency

test upon which the respondents have passed the order dated

26.07.2019, rejecting the representation submitted by the

petitioner and the respondents have mentioned in their reply that

the petitioner has submitted the representation after more than 2

months, whereas, the representation was submitted by the

petitioner just after passing of the order dated 07.09.2018 i.e. on

04.10.2018.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have

no respect of the orders passed by this court and rejected the

representation submitted by the petitioner for fixing the date of

physical efficiency test, after four weeks of the delivery of the

child of the petitioner.

Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted

that they have duly considered the representation and the same

was dismissed as the petitioner has submitted the representation

beyond a period of two months.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be

allowed for the reasons; firstly, from the material which has come

on record it appears that the respondents have no respect of the

orders passed by this court as in the earlier round of litigation

itself this court directed the respondents to pass appropriate

orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner for fixing

date for physical efficiency test within a period of four weeks,

however, despite representation received by the respondents on

04.10.2018 they have rejected the same on the pretext that the

petitioner submitted the representation after more than two

months, whereas, the representation was submitted within a

(5 of 5) [CW-13366/2019]

period of four weeks from the date of the order dated 07.09.2018

i.e. on 04.10.2018; secondly, the respondents have failed to

consider that at the time of first physical examination the

petitioner was pregnant; thirdly, in my considered view, it is a

case of non-application of mind by the respondents in rejecting

the representation/case of the petitioner.

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed and

the order passed by the respondents dated 26.07.2019 qua the

petitioner is set aside and the respondents are directed to fix the

date for physical efficiency test within a period of four weeks from

receiving the certified copy of this order, with intimation of the

same to the petitioner seven days before the date of physical

efficiency test and give appointment to the petitioner if she is

found eligible as per her category and merit.

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

MG/120

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)