Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Manju Jakhar vs State And Ors (2023/Rjjd/015356) on 16 May, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023/RJJD/015356]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5091/2018
Manju Jakhar D/o Kheenya Ram W/o Rakesh Bhakal, R/o Village
And Post Bhakarod, District Nagaur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Revenue
Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Land Record, Board Of Revenue For
Rajasthan, Ajmer.
3. District Collector Land Record, Nagaur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umashankar Dhakad for
Mr. Hanuman Singh Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : -
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
16/05/2023
1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has
challenged the determination of seats reserved for OBC female
candidates.
2. The petitioner's grievance is qua the seats notified for the
District Nagaur, wherein out of total 80 seats notified for the post
of Patwari, only 4 seats have been earmarked for 'OBC Female'.
3. It was argued by Mr. Dhakad, learned counsel for the
petitioner that reservation for OBC candidates is 21% and
accordingly, the figure comes to 16.80 (80 X 21 ÷ 100), out of
which 30% seats should be reserved for female candidates which
further comes to 5.04 seats, whereas only 4 seats have been
reserved for OBC (Women).
[2023/RJJD/015356] (2 of 3) [CW-5091/2018]
4. Learned counsel argued that for OBC Woman candidates 5
seats ought to have been kept reserved and the recruitment which
has been done applying wrong reservation deserves to be set
aside.
5. Heard.
6. The result of the recruitment was declared on 06.01.2014.
7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has not laid any
challenge to such determination of seats before she took part in
the selection process. She had not only submitted her application
form but also participated in the process and regardless of the fact
that result was declared on 06.01.2014, she remained in
hibernation for about four years. It is well settled position of law
that principle of estoppel prevents a candidate from challenging a
selection process after having taken part in it, as has been
reiterated by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in plethora of judgments.
8. In view of the aforesaid, without commenting upon or
adjudicating upon the issue involved in the present case, this
Court is of the view that no indulgence can be granted to the
petitioner at such belated stage.
9. If the petitioner had any grievance, she ought to have raised
it at the very outset, i.e. on issuance of the advertisement on
04.04.2013.
10. That apart, after the recruitment of 2013 more recruitments
to the post of Patwari have taken place, the lacuna (if any) which
has crept, has become irreversible and incurable.
11. No relief can be granted to the petitioner at this belated
stage. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.
[2023/RJJD/015356] (3 of 3) [CW-5091/2018]
12. Stay petition also stands dismissed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
11-Ramesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
