Ruchi Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 7011 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5000/2022

Ruchi Sharma D/o Sh. Suresh Sharma, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of 57, Housing Board, District Pratapgarh.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

3. The Tehsildar, Pratapgarh.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Sushil Solanki
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG.
                               Mr. Deepak Chandak.



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                    Order

11/05/2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

against the order Annex.7 passed by the respondents rejecting the

candidature of the petitioner for lack of special bonafide resident

certificate resident (TSP) for recruitment to the post of Teacher

Grade III Level I for TSP area pursuant to the advertisement

dated 31.12.2021.

It is inter-alia indicated in the petition that petitioner applied

for the post pursuant to the advertisement dated 31.12.2021 in

her category and her name appeared in the list meant for

document verification, the petitioner uploaded her documents,

wherein, for the purpose of her residence in TSP area, she

annexed a certificate Annex.1 dated 28.05.2015, however, her

(2 of 6) [CW-5000/2022]

candidature was rejected for lack of special bonafide resident

certificate by the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that

vide Annex.10, before the last date of filing application for the

recruitment, which was 16.02.2022, the petitioner had made an

application on 28.01.2022 with the Patwari, the Patwari made a

report inter-alia indicating that petitioner was married in Udaipur,

as apparently the said endorsement at the given stage dis-entitled

the petitioner from getting the requisite certificate, the petitioner

did not thereafter moved application before the Tehsildar,

however, vide Annex.8, the petitioner again approached for

issuance of the special bonafide resident certificate on

04.03.2022, where again the Patwari made the same report

regarding the petitioner being married at Udaipur.

Based on the said endorsement, the petitioner filed writ

petition before this Court, which came to be decided by order

dated 01.04.2022 in Ruchi Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.:

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3851/2022, wherein, directions were

given to the respondents to issue the Special Bonafide Resident

Certificate (TSP Area), whereafter, the petitioner applied before

the Tehsildar on 05.04.2022 and the certificate (Annex.9) dated

06.04.2022 was issued to the petitioner.

Submissions have been made that though the petitioner is a

special Bonafide Resident of the area in question, the Authorities

issuing the certificate in this regard, on account of her marriage

outside the TSP area as indicated in the report made by the

Patwari, were unwilling to issue certificate to her and, therefore,

the petitioner approached this Court and after directions issued by

this Court, the certificate has been issued to the petitioner.

(3 of 6) [CW-5000/2022]

Submissions have been made that the petitioner had

annexed a certificate dated 28.05.2015 i.e. prior to her marriage

indicating her status as bonafide resident of the TSP Area,

however, in view of the subsequent notifications, the said

certificate was not taken into consideration.

Submissions have been made that on account of peculiar

circumstances, wherein, though the petitioner made attempts to

get the requisite certificate before the last date of application and

the certificate was ultimately issued after the petitioner

approached this Court and the petitioner falls in merit, she may

not be deprived of the selection, in case, she is otherwise eligible

and, therefore, the cancellation of her candidature be set-aside.

Learned AAG made submissions that from a bare perusal of

the advertisement it is apparent that the candidates were required

to produce Special Bonafide Resident Certificate in terms of

notification dated 04.07.2016 and 21.10.2019 and production of

the certificate in this regard was mandatory besides the fact that

the certificate should have been issued prior to the last date of

application, as indicated in the advertisement, which was

16.02.2022.

As admittedly, the petitioner had produced certificate, which

was not in consonance with the notification dated 04.07.2016 and

21.10.2019, as the same is dated 28.05.2015 and the certificate

now sought to be relied on is after the last date of application, the

rejection of petitioner's candidature is justified.

Further submissions have been made that the attempts now

made by the petitioner, based on the fact that she had filed

application/attempted to get the certificate prior to the last date of

application, cannot be taken note of, inasmuch as, the same

(4 of 6) [CW-5000/2022]

cannot be a reason for questioning the rejection of petitioner's

candidature.

Submissions have also been made that if the said aspect is

held as a requirement prior to the rejection of the candidature of

the candidates, the same would result in an unending process in

the recruitment, as the recruitment agency is only required to look

at the documents filed/uploaded alongwith the application and,

therefore, the petition deserves dismissal.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

The factual aspect is not in dispute, wherein, the petitioner

relied on a certificate dated 28.05.2015 for the purpose of

indicating her status as bonafide resident of TSP area. However,

the said certificate was not in consonance with the requirements

of the advertisement, wherein, the candidates were required to

produce certificate in consonance with notification dated

04.07.2016 and 21.10.2019 and, therefore, the respondents were

apparently justified in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner.

However, the fact that the petitioner, who was married

outside the TSP area and prior to the judgment of this Court in

Anita Suthar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.5450/2021, decided on 19.01.2022, the Authorities issuing the

certificate were rejecting the applications and similar nature

endorsement was made on the application filed by the petitioner

on 28.01.2022, indicating her marriage outside the TSP area,

apparently the petitioner thereafter did not take steps for applying

before the Tehsildar. She again attempted to get the requisite

certificate by making another application on 04.03.2022 and when

again similar nature endorsement was made, she approached this

(5 of 6) [CW-5000/2022]

Court by filing the writ petition, wherein, order was granted to

issue certificate to her on 01.04.2022 and petitioner applied to the

Tehsildar on 05.04.2022 and the certificate was issued on

06.04.2022.

In the peculiar circumstances of the case, wherein, on

account of the status, which was prevalent at the relevant time,

when the petitioner had moved application seeking Special

Bonafide Resident Certificate and endorsement, apparently for

rejecting her application was made by the Patwari, which attempt

to get the requisite certificate was made by the petitioner before

the last date of application and in normal course, if the petitioner

had applied to the Tehsildar and certificate as required was issued,

the same would have been issued prior to the last date of

application, as reflected from the fact that after order passed by

this Court, the petitioner applied on 05.04.2022 and the certificate

was issued on 06.04.2022, entitling the petitioner to be eligible on

all the counts as indicated in the advertisement i.e. requisite

certificate in terms of the notifications as well as a certificate prior

to the last date of application.

In that view of the matter and due to peculiar circumstances

of the present case, the respondents need to consider the

candidature of the petitioner based on the Special Bonafide

Resident Certificate dated 06.04.2022, now produced by the

petitioner.

There is substance in the submissions made by learned

counsel for the respondents that so far as the rejection of the

petitioner's candidature at the relevant point of time is concerned,

the same on account of the document annexed is justified.

However, as observed, hereinbefore, the peculiar circumstances,

(6 of 6) [CW-5000/2022]

which exist in the present case, candidature of the petitioner on

part of the respondents requires reconsideration by taking into

consideration the certificate dated 06.04.2022.

In view of the above discussion, the petition filed by the

petitioner is allowed. The cancellation of petitioner's candidature is

set-aside.

The respondents are directed to consider the candidature of

the petitioner based on the Special Bonafide Resident Certificate

dated 06.04.2022 produced by the petitioner and in case, he is

otherwise eligible and in merit, include her name in the merit list.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 60-pradeep/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)