Poona Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1587 Raj

[2023/RJJD/004582]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14955/2018

Jagdish Bhakar S/o Hari Ram Bhakar, Aged About 22 Years, Bhakro Ki Dhani, Village And Post Kiramsariyab Khurd, Tehsil Tinwari, District Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department , Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Elementary Education , Rajasthan, Bikaner.

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13861/2018 Om Prakash S/o Shri Mangi Lal, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Gandhi Sagar, Bhiyasar, Tehsil Phalodi, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13866/2018

1. Jeevan Ram Udawat S/o Shri Babu Lal Udawat, Aged About 38 Years, Bera Walal Bass, Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

2. Ghama Ram Meghwal S/o Shri Ruga Ram Meghwal,, Aged About 38 Years, Vpo Chaba, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

3. Manoj Kumar Meena S/o Shri Rohitas Kumar,, Aged About 34 Years, Vpo Charawas, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

[2023/RJJD/004582] (2 of 6) [CW-14955/2018]

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13875/2018 Dinesh S/o Shri Mula Ram, Aged About 22 Years, Vpo Naharwali, Tehsil Anupgarh, District Sriganganagar, Rajasthan

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14704/2018

1. Poona Ram S/o Koja Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village And Post Mandiyai Kallan, Tehsil Tinwari, District Jodhpur (Raj.)

2. Dharmendra Choudhary S/o Choutha Ram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village And Post Dhandhaniya Bhayal, Tehsil Balesar, District Jodhpur.

3. Oma Ram S/o Mohan Ram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Bhakharon Ki Dhani, Thob, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

4. Chhotu Ram S/o Karna Ram, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Post Jori Patta Satyun, District Churu.

5. Avinash S/o Mohar Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village And Post Jori Patta Satyun, District Churu.

[2023/RJJD/004582] (3 of 6) [CW-14955/2018]

6. Rupa Ram S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Cream Nagar, Newara Road, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14767/2018 Suresh S/o Harji Ram Sharma, Aged About 27 Years, Village Dhandhaniya Sasan, Tehsil Balesar, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14944/2018

1. Oma Ram S/o Mohan Ram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Bhakharon Ki Dhani, Thob, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

2. Avinash S/o Mohar Singh, Aged About 22 Years, Village And Post Jori Patta Satyun, District Churu.

3. Chhotu Ram S/o Karna Ram,, Aged About 24 Years, Village And Post Akla, Tehsil Khinvsar, District Nagaur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

----Respondents

[2023/RJJD/004582] (4 of 6) [CW-14955/2018]

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohan Singh Shekhawat for Mr. Kailash Jangid Mr. Umashankar Dhakad For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG a/w Mr. Rishi Soni

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

09/02/2023

1. These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India have been preferred, in sum and substance, with the

following prayers and for the sake of convenience, the prayer

clause is being taken from the case being S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.13861/2018.

"A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the cut- off dated 03.09.2018 (Annex.6), Provisional Selection list dated 03.09.2018 (Annex.7) and any order denying the selection and appointment of the petitioner for the post of Special Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) (MR) Social Studies in pursuance of the advertisement dated 31.07.2018 (Annex.4) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner against the cut-off marks of unreserved category while given the 5% relaxation in his percentage marks of graduation for selection and appointment post of Special Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) (MR) Social Studies as per the condition no.9.4 of the advertisement dated 31.07.2018.

C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to prepare afresh selection while considering the name of the petitioner as per his qualification and as having higher marks than the

[2023/RJJD/004582] (5 of 6) [CW-14955/2018]

cut-off of his respective category for the post of Special Teacher (Level-II) (MR) Social Studies in pursuance of the advertisement dated 31.07.2018. D. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to permit the petitioner in the further selection process and provide the appointment as per his qualification and merit status on the post of Special Teacher (Level-II) (MR) Social Studies in pursuance of the advertisement dated 31.07.2018, with all consequential benefits."

2. The bone of contention is that the petitioners, who are

belonging to reserved category, sought recruitment arising out of

advertisement dated 31.07.2018 for Teacher Grade-III and

associated posts. The point of dispute is that for the recruitment in

question, the merit of reserved category has gone above the merit

of the general category and therefore, the contention of learned

counsel for the petitioner is that it is an upward movement and

thus, the persons belonging to the reserved category concerned

and having secured higher marks than the General Category, while

being in their respective reserved category, ought to be given

appointment on the post in question, against the post meant for

the general category candidates.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Pankaj Sharma

clarifies two things which are common to all the matters; one is

that all the petitioners are below the merit of general category and

second thing is that upward movement has been ruled out from

the general category, which is admittedly lower, as the same

would have been possible only if the petitioners had not taken any

concession apart from fee in the reserved category concerned. It

is admitted position that the petitioners had taken a concession of

[2023/RJJD/004582] (6 of 6) [CW-14955/2018]

relaxation of 5% in the basic qualification of graduation and thus,

they are not entitled for the upward movement.

4. In support of above contention, learned counsel for the

respondent has relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble

Apex Court in Deepa E.V. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported

in (2017) 12 SCC 680 and Gaurav Pradhan & Ors. Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in (2018) 11 SCC 352.

5. This Court, after examining the position of law as well as

submission made hereinabove, finds that in Deepa E.V. (supra)

and Gaurav Pradhan (supra) clearly laid down the law that if a

person takes any advantage of a reserved category, apart from

the fee concession, then he will not be entitled for movement into

general category. The case law cited by learned counsel for the

respondent is absolutely applicable in the present case.

6. Thus, in view of above, the writ petitions are dismissed. All

pending applications also stand disposed of.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 11-17-Sudheer/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)