Mukesh Teli vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 7285 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2188/2022 Mukesh Teli S/o Shri Mohanlal Teli, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of C-49, R.k. Colony, Bhilwara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Home Department, (Group-1), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Additional Director General Of Police, Recruitment And Promotion Board, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4. Priyash S/o Shri Jatan Singh,, Selected On The Post Of Sub- Inspector, Resident Of Merruth, Uttar Pradeesh.

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. R.C. Joshi.
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG with Mr. Kailash
                                 Choudhary.



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                      Order

16/05/2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

against the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement dated

28.12.2019.

Submissions have been made that the petitioner participated

in the category of wrestling free-style 70 kg. weight. The

respondents reduced the marks from 37 to 27 for participation in

National Sports, which was not justified and that the trial of the

petitioner was conducted against a person, who was more in

weight to the petitioner and was working as constable with the

respondents, which was not justified.

(2 of 3) [CW-2914/2022]

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the issue

pertains to reduction of the marks from 37 to 27 stands concluded

by order of this Court in Kanika Singh Rajawat v. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1987/2022, decided

on 10.05.2022 (at Jaipur Bench), wherein it has been laid down as

under :-

"This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed for the reasons; firstly, although the petitioner has levelled the allegation of mala-fide against the officers of Department in reducing the marks, however, no person by name has been impleaded as party respondent in the writ petition; secondly, the marks in the category of the petitioner has been reduced by the respondents even before the last date of submitting the application form by issuing the corrigendum, therefore, in my considered view, the act of respondent cannot be said to be an arbitrary as the same applies to all the candidates, as such there is no violation of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India; lastly, the petitioner is estopped to challenge the selection process after participating in the same, in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ashok Kumar & Anr. (supra), therefore, I am not inclined to exercise the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India."

Further submissions have been made that a specific affidavit

has been filed by the respondents, inter-alia, indicting that in

terms of Condition 10(c) of the advertisement as the candidate in

petitioner's category / weight was not available, the trial was

conducted with Mr. Vishnu Chahar, who is working as Constable in

the respondent department and was selected against the post

reserved for sports person in 70 kg. weight category and as such,

the plea raised in this regard has no basis.

Learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to make

submissions that the Constable Mr. Vishnu Chahar with which the

trial was conducted, was higher in weight and therefore, the retrial

should be conducted.

(3 of 3) [CW-2914/2022]

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel

for the petitioner. So far as the issue relating to reduction of

marks from 37 to 27 is concerned, the same stands covered by

order in the case of Kanika Singh Rajawat (supra).

The challenge laid to the trial conducted, cannot be

countenanced in view of the specific affidavit filed by the

respondents regarding the Constable, who participated in the trial

against the petitioner in view of the specific indication made in the

advertisement as under :-

"uksV%& ;fn fdlh O;fDrxr Li/kkZvksa esa ,d gh vH;FkhZ gS rks ,slh fLFkfr esa vH;FkhZ dh [ksy fo'ks"k dh n{krk ds vkadyu gsrq p;u cksMZ fdlh ckgj ds f[kykM+h dks cqykdj mlls Li/kkZ djk ldsxkA"

Further once the respondents have specifically indicated that

the said Constable was from 70 kg. category, the plea raised in

the petition in absence of any further material cannot be accepted.

The writ petition has no substance, the same is, therefore,

dismissed.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 165-Rmathur/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)