Roopwati Deora vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 2438 Raj

[2023/RJJD/007114]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16017/2019

1. Roopwati Deora W/o Sampat Raj Deora, Aged About 45 Years, By Caste Mali, Resident Of Sutharo Ka Mohalla, Magra Punjla, Jodhpur.

2. Leelawati Swami D/o Ashwini Swami, Aged About 41 Years, C-119, Kirti Nagar, Magraj Punjla, Jodhpur.

3. Roop Chand Sen S/o Jugal Kishore, Aged About 42 Years, By Caste Nai, Resident Of Guljar Nagar-A, In Front Of Bhadwasia Gas Godown, Gali No.10, Bhadwasia, Jodhpur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Child Empowerment Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Commissioner And Secretary, Department Of Child Empowement Department, 20/198, Kaveri Path, Sector-2, Mansarovar, Jaipur.

3. The Director And Joint Secretary, Department Of Child Empowerment Department, 20/198, Kaveri Path, Sector- 2, Mansarovar, Jaipur.

4. Asstt. Director, District Child Unit, Jodhpur.

5. Dhanpat Gurjar S/o Peeru Ram Gurjar, Chairman, Child Welfare Committee, Jodhpur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Smt. Roopwati Deora (petitioner No.1) present in person.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Gaur, Addl.Advocate General Mr. Deepesh Beniwal

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Judgment

Reserved on 21/03/2023

Pronounced on 27/03/2023

1. The lawyers are abstaining from the work due to strike.

[2023/RJJD/007114] (2 of 6) [CW-16017/2019]

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ order or direction:

(i) the impugned notification dated 16.10.2019 (Ann.7) passed by respondent no.2 and the list of the applicants dated 06.08.2019 (Ann.6) may kindly be declared highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and malafide one and same may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) the respondent authorities may kindly be restrained from handing over the charge of the post of Chairman, Child Welfare Committee, Jodhpur to the respondent no.5.

(iii) The respondent authorities may kindly be directed to constitute the Child Welfare Committee, Johdpur in accordance with the list 30.07.2019 (Ann.5) by conducting fresh interview.

(iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners."

3. As the pleaded facts and the record would reveal, vide

advertisement dated 24.01.2019 issued by the respondent No.2,

applications were invited, from social workers, for nomination as

Chairman & four Members (out of which one must have been a

female candidate and one candidate must have been a subject

specialist, related to children), for the purpose of Constitution of

the Child Welfare Committee, in District Jodhpur as well as in

various other districts of the State; the last date for submission of

the application form, as per the advertisement, was 11.02.2019.

However, vide amended advertisement dated 01.03.2019, issued

for the same purpose, the last date was extended from

11.02.2019, till 28.02.2019.

[2023/RJJD/007114] (3 of 6) [CW-16017/2019]

3.1 For the purpose of such nominations i.e. Chairman and

Members of the Child Welfare Committee, the State Government,

vide notification dated 11.06.2019, constituted the State Level

Selection Committee, which proceeded with the selection process

by holding the interviews for the nominations, as per the

schedule, and finalized the nomination process.

3.2 After conclusion of the selection process, the Child Welfare

Committee, Jodhpur and the private respondent No.5 was

nominated as Chairman of the said Committee, vide the impugned

notification dated 16.10.2019. Aggrieved thereby, the present

petition has been preferred, claiming the aforequoted reliefs, while

alleging, amongst others, the nomination of the private

respondent No.5 to be a backdoor entry, being contrary to the

selection process for the nomination in question, as prescribed

under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,

2015 and Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model

Rules, 2016, framed thereunder.

4. Smt. Roopwati Deora, petitioner No.1 present in person

submitted that the respondent No.3, vide communication dated

30.07.2019, addressed to the respondent No.4, informed that for

Jodhpur District, 95 applications were received for the nominations

as Chairman and Members; subsequently, however, a list of 96

candidates came to be published on 06.08.2019; vide notification

dated 16.10.2019, the respondent no.5 has been nominated as

Chairman, which in the given facts, is highly illegal and

unsustainable in the eye of law.

5. The petitioner in person further submitted that it is clear

that the respondent no.5 has not submitted the application before

[2023/RJJD/007114] (4 of 6) [CW-16017/2019]

the last date of submission of the application, but the respondent

authorities illegally and without adopting the due process of

selection, as prescribed in the Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Ideal Rules, 2016, nominated the

respondent no. 5 as Chairman, Child Welfare Committee, Jodhpur.

6. On the other hand, Mr. AK Gaur, learned Additional Advocate

General and Mr. Deepesh Beniwal, representing the respondents

opposed the aforesaid submissions made by the petitioner in

person, and submitted that 160 applications, in totality, were

received (95 applications for Chairmen, Child Welfare Committee

and 65 applications for Members of the Juvenile Justice Board);

thus, the respondents received total 95 applications for the Child

Welfare Committee and the same was forwarded to the office of

the Director of the Department for Child Rights vide

communication dated 29.03.2019, wherein the name of

respondent no.5 was mentioned at serial no. 93.

7. He further submitted that the communication dated

30.07.2019 would reveal that the name of one Mr. Jitendra

Achraya appeared at serial no.88 and 89, and thus, the name of

said person was mistakenly repeated; whereafter, the said bona

fide mistake was corrected, total 94 applications were left; under

such circumstances, the forms were again scrutinized and it was

found that application form of respondent no.5- Dhanpat Raj Gujar

did not receive due consideration. As per the respondents,

thereafter communication dated 06.08.2019 along with amended

list was issued, and thus, the allegation levelled by the petitioner

[2023/RJJD/007114] (5 of 6) [CW-16017/2019]

in relation to the number of candidates is baseless and

misconceived.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents also submitted that the

last date of application form was extended till 28.02.2019 which

later got extended till 15.03.2019. As per the respondents, the

application form, as submitted by the respondent no.5 on

11.02.2019 for the post of Chairman of the Child Welfare

Committee, was submitted within time.

9. Heard the petitioner present in person and the learned

counsel for the respondents, as well as perused the record of the

case.

10. This Court finds that the advertisement in question was

issued on 24.01.2019, inviting applications for the post of

Chairman and Members - Child Welfare Committee and Juvenile

Justice Board, respectively. The date of submission of forms was

extended and last date for submission of form, upon extension,

was 15.03.2019. Thereafter, the meeting of State Selection

Committee, so constituted for the process in question, was held on

30.07.2019, fixing the schedule for the interview for the

aforementioned posts. Subsequently, vide communication dated

06.08.2019, the date of interview was changed; the respondent

no. 2 after holding the interviews, issued a notification dated

16.10.2019, whereby the Child Welfare Committee, Jodhpur has

been constituted, and the respondent no.5 has been nominated

being the Chairman of the said committee.

[2023/RJJD/007114] (6 of 6) [CW-16017/2019]

11. This Court further finds that the respondent no. 5 submitted

his application form on 11.02.2019 (Annexure-R/1) for the post of

Chairman of the Child Welfare Committee. Therefore, the said

application form was filed within the stipulated time, as notified by

the respondent-Department, and thus, the respondent no. 5 was

eligible for participating in the interview process, as conducted by

respondent-Department.

12. This Court also finds that the communication dated

30.07.2019 clearly reveals that the name of one Mr. Jitendra

Achraya was repeated due to bona fide mistake, as submitted by

the respondents; after rectification and correction of the said

mistake, the application forms were again scrutinized, and

thereafter, the respondent no.5 was considered for interview

process. Therefore, the action of the respondent-Department does

not suffer from any legal infirmity.

13. In light of the aforesaid observations and looking into the

given factual matrix, this Court does not find it a fit case so as to

grant any relief to the petitioners in the present petition.

14. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. All pending

applications stand disposed of.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

SKant/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)