Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Laxmi Meena vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 February, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023/RJJD/004281]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3085/2021
Laxmi Meena D/o Shri Nenu Ram Meena, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Gandhinagar , Meenawas Mohalla , Abu Road, Distt. Sirohi ,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary ,
Department Of School Education , Rajasthan , Jaipur.
2. The Secretary , Panchayatiraj Department, (Elementary
Education) , Secretariat , Jaipur
3. The Director , Elementary Education, Rajasthan , Bikaner
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Banswara ,
Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.P. Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
06/02/2023
Learned Additional Advocate General fairly submits that the
controversy involved in the present writ petition is no more res-
integra and it is covered by the decision rendered by the Division
Bench of this Hon'ble Court in Secretary, RPSC & Anr. Vs.
Sangeeta Varhat ; D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.72/2022
and other connected appeal on 10.11.2022. The relevant portion
of the judgment reads as under:
"Admittedly, the respondents submitted application
seeking appointment on advertised posts against the seats
reserved for divorcee candidates. The decree of divorce issued
by competent court was not possessed by the petitioners on the
[2023/RJJD/004281] (2 of 3) [CW-3085/2021]
cut off date. The appointment in the divorcee category has been
claimed on the ground of having obtained customary divorce and
non application of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 upon marriages and
divorce amongst the members of Scheduled Tribe/Tribal Sub Plan
communities.
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 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.
No order as to costs."
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed in the same terms
in light of the decision rendered vide order dated 10.11.2022
[2023/RJJD/004281] (3 of 3) [CW-3085/2021]
passed in Secretary, RPSC & Anr. Vs. Sangeeta Varhat's case
(supra). All pending applications also stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
43-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
