Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Anita Devi vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:2518) on 15 January, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:2518]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 516/2025
Anita Devi W/o Karmpal, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Aam
Chok, Bas Chanani, Churu, Rajasthan - 331023.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Medical And Health Science (Group-Ii), Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical Health And Family
Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Director, State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare
(Sihfw), Department Of Health, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajat Arora.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Dave, Govt. Counsel.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order
15/01/2025
1. Petitioner herein is before this Court, aggrieved by an
undated decision (Annex.17), rejecting her candidature in the
EWS category instead treating her in the General category for the
selection process on the post of Nursing Officer.
2. Briefly speaking relevant facts of the case are as follows:
2.1. The petitioner was born in the state of Haryana and later
migrated to the state of Rajasthan after her marriage. She
belongs to the EWS category, as her gross family income is below
the prescribed limit. The respondents issued an advertisement
dated 05.05.2023 (Annex.5) for the post of Nursing Officer. The
petitioner, being eligible, applied for the position. However, as a
migrant candidate, she was forced to submit the application in the
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (2 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
unreserved category, despite belonging to the EWS category. The
petitioner approached the respondents to change her category
vide representation dated 13.09.2023 (Annex.11).
2.2. Subsequently, the respondents issued a list for document
verification (Annex.12) after changing the categories of candidates
who had submitted representations which were accepted.
However, the petitioner was inexplicably not called for verification
in EWS category.
2.3. The respondents then issued a provisional list dated
07.10.2023 (Annex.13), but despite the petitioner having secured
marks higher than the cutoff in the EWS-Female category, she was
excluded from the recruitment process. Aggrieved, the petitioner
submitted another representation (Annex.14) requesting that her
candidature be considered in the EWS category. Despite this,
when the final list dated 06.10.2024 (Annex.16) was issued, the
petitioner's name was not included, even though she had obtained
marks higher than the cutoff for the EWS category, and no valid
reason was provided.
2.4. Subsequently, the respondents gave an undated decision
(Annex.17) rejecting her representations. Hence, this petition.
3. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.
4. First and foremost, the status of the petitioner of belonging
to Economically Weaker Section ('EWS') category is not in dispute
herein. Her candidature in the said category was rejected on the
ground that the EWS certificate provided to her was after the cut-
off date of advertisement.
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (3 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
5. In this context reference may be had to a Circular dated
17.10.2022 (Annex.15), English translation (as provided by
counsel) of which reads as under:
"This department had issued the following in Circular
No. 7 (1) Personnel/K-2/2019, dated 20.01.2022:
'Reservation provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC),
Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC),
Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), and Economically
Weaker Sections (EWS) candidates are included in all service
rules for the recruitment to posts under the state government.
Candidates seeking the benefit of reservation in recruitment to
Central and State government posts must submit a certificate
of the relevant category, based on which their eligibility in the
respective category is assessed. Candidates are entitled to the
benefit of reservation from the date the certificate is issued,
and it is mandatory for the candidate to possess a certificate
issued by the competent authority before the last date of
application. The certificate held by candidates must be issued
before the last date of application, so that there is no dispute
regarding the date of the certificate when providing the
reserved category benefits after the recruitment process
begins.'
At the end of the above circular, the following addition is
made:
'If, for any reason, the candidate does not submit the
certificate issued by the last date of application, and instead
submits a certificate issued after the last date, such candidates
must submit an affidavit stating that they were eligible for the
respective category on the last date of application, and that if
this information is found to be incorrect, their appointment
may be canceled.'
Therefore, all concerned are directed to take action
accordingly as per the above instructions."
6. A perusal of the above clearly leaves no manner of doubt
that although all candidates are required to submit their requisite
certificates as of the cut-off date, but the proviso, which is an
integral part of the main provision, clearly states that if, for certain
reasons, a candidate is unable to provide the certificate as of the
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (4 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
cut-off date, the same can be submitted after the cut-off date has
gone past. Provided, that an undertaking/affidavit is submitted by
the candidate stating that, as of the cut-off date, he/she belonged
to the category for which the certificate has been submitted.
7. In order to avoid misuse of the said proviso, a clear warning
has also been given in the proviso that in case the
affidavit/undertaking given by the candidate is found to be wrong,
the appointment obtained on that basis can be terminated
summarily.
8. A perusal of advertisement dated 05.05.2023 (Annex.5)
?k
under the column ( ) (vU; fooj.k) in category (ऑनलाइन आवेदन त्रुटि
संशोधन अवधि) clearly states in as many words (translated in
english) that "Applicants from Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled
Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), Extremely Backward
Classes (EBC), and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) will be
allowed to submit the prescribed certificate and affidavit as per
Personnel (K-2) Department Circular No. 7(1) Personnel/K-2/2019,
dated 17.10.2022."
9. Thus the aforesaid circular dated 17.10.2022 is applicable to
the advertisement in question is a conceded position herein.
10. As regards the rejection of the petitioner on the ground that
she had obtained fewer marks in the general category since her
candidature was not accepted in the EWS category, I am unable to
find any substance in view of the circular dated 12.09.2023
(Annex. 10), which was issued after the advertisement. According
to this circular, candidates were allowed to make changes to their
original application forms, including a change in category, as is
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (5 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
evident from Clause-7 of the circular dated 12.09.2023 (Annex.
10), which reads as follows:
"7. प्रार्थना पत्र में निम्नानुसार जानकारी देनी है:-
1. आपका नाम
2. आवेदित पद का नाम
3. आई.डी. संख्या
4. मोबाईल संख्या
5. विषयवस्तु (एक या अधिक भी हो सकती है):-
नाम में संशोधन
जातिगत श्रेणी में परिवर्तन
Horizontal श्रेणी में परिवर्ततन
10 वीं/ 12 वीं की अंकतालिका के अंको में संशोधन
व्यावसायिक योग्यता के अंको में संशोधन
बच्चों की संख्या
रजिस्ट्रेशन क्रं माक / दिनांक में संशोधन
अनुभव में संशोधन
अन्य"
11. Pursuant to the aforesaid circular, which provided a window
for a limited period from 13.09.2023 to 19.09.2023, the petitioner
requested a change in her category from General to EWS based on
the subsequent certificate provided to her. Even though she
belonged to the EWS category as of the cut-off date, she could not
submit the certificate online as she was not in physical possession
of it.
12. There is an admission on part of the respondents regarding
the petitioner not being given the benefit of the change in
category after the window was provided for all candidates to
modify their online application forms. This amounts to tacit
acknowledgment, as the absence of any denial of the petitioner's
request for a change of category indicates that it was rejected.
13. In fact, the representation (Annex.17) submitted by the
petitioner for redressal of her grievance was kept pending without
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (6 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
any speaking order being passed regarding the same. Though her
name was placed in the list of candidates whose candidature was
rejected due to the change of category, it was stated that since
she had already applied in the general category, her subsequent
request for a category change could not be treated as valid in light
of the judgment rendered in Sonal Tyagi Vs. State of
Rajasthan: DBSAW No. 7840/2019.
14. Having perused the judgment in Sonal Tyagi's case, it
becomes clear that its application in the petitioner's case is
misplaced, as in that case no opportunity was provided to any
candidate to change their category after the filing of online
applications. Therefore, this Court held that the cut-off date must
be strictly adhered to. Whereas, in the case in hand, the
respondents themselves allowed candidates to change their
category after submitting the online application, effectively
extending the cut-off date.
15. As for the change of location from Haryana to Rajasthan, it
does not render the petitioner ineligible to seek the benefit of the
EWS certificate issued by the competent authority.
16. Reference in this regard may be had to a Single Bench
judgment of this Court in Aman Kumari Vs. State of Rajasthan
& Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7512/2022, decided on
21.09.2022, wherein it was held as follows:
"I have considered the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties and have perused the material
available on record.
The respondents, in the stipulation, made reference to the
judgment in the case of Ranjana Kumari v. State of
Uttrakhand & Ors. : (2019)15 SCC 664 and thereafter has
observed that those married into the State, would not be
entitled to the benefit of OBC, SC, ST & EWS category. The
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (7 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
said stipulation made by the respondents in the
advertisement is ex facie contrary to the very scheme of
EWS reservation as compared to the reservation provided to
OBC, SC & ST and the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Ranjana Kumari (supra), which
apparently has no application to reservation meant for EWS
category.
The circulars of the State, inter-alia, after observing that
the Central Government has provided for reservation in
educational institution and services to the extent of 10% for
EWS category candidates and for issuance of certificate to
the woman married within the State, it was stipulated as
under :-
"nwljk ;fn fookfgr efgyk dh mlds ewy jkT; esa mldh
iSr`d tkfr lkekU; oxZ esa gS rFkk mldk fookg jktLFkku
jkT; ds fdlh vkjf{kr oxZ ds O;fDr ls gqvk gS rks Hkh og
jktLFkku jkT; esa lkekU; oxZ ¼vFkkZr vuqlwfpr tkfr]
tutkfr o vU; fiNM+k oxZ ds vfrfjDr½ esa ekuh
tk;sxh] ,oa ,sls vkfFkZd detksj oxZ EWS ds O;fDr dks
fu/kkZfjr ekin.Mksa ds vuqlkj Income & Asset
Certificate ikus ds gdnkj gksxsaA"
The stipulation is specific, wherein they have been held
entitled to issuance of EWS certificate.
Once, the State itself in its Circular dated 16.08.2021 has
ordered for issuance of EWS certificate to eligible woman
married within the State, the stipulation in the advertisement
dated 31.12.2021 essentially is contrary to the said circular
and cannot debar the candidates like petitioners, who are
otherwise entitled to the benefit of reservation provided to
the EWS category candidates.
The submissions made in the reply pertaining to estoppal
and the fact that the Circulars dated 10.02.2020 &
16.08.2021 (Annex.11 to CWP No.7512/2022) are general in
nature, have no substance, inasmuch as, once it is found that
the stipulation in the advertisement is ex facie contrary to
the scheme of EWS reservation and the respondents' own
circular, the petitioners cannot be debarred from claiming
the benefits based on the plea of estoppal.
Further as noticed herein-before the Circular dated
16.08.2021 is very specific, wherein the same starts with
reference to the benefits available to the EWS category
candidates for employment / services etc. and therefore, it
cannot be said that the circular is general in nature and
does not apply to recruitments.
In view of the above, the writ petitions are allowed. The
respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the
petitioners in EWS category and in case, they are otherwise
[2025:RJ-JD:2518] (8 of 8) [CW-516/2025]
eligible and fall within the cut-off meant for EWS category
candidates, they be accorded appointment on the post of
Teacher Grade-III (Level-I)."
17. In view of the aforesaid judgment, the objection that the
petitioner obtained a certificate from Haryana and cannot be given
the benefit in Rajasthan is being noted only to be rejected.
18. It also transpires that the aforesaid judgment passed by the
learned Single Judge has attained finality, as neither any intra-
court appeal nor any SLP was filed against it by the State.
19. As an upshot, the petition is allowed. The respondents are
directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner in the EWS
category in terms of the circular dated 17.10.2022 (Annex. 15) by
taking an undertaking/affidavit from the petitioner that as of the
cut-off date, she belonged to the EWS category. Upon subsequent
verification, if the information is found to be false, it goes without
saying that the petitioner shall face the consequences.
20. Needful necessary exercise should be completed within 30
days from the date the petitioner approaches the respondents
with a web print of the instant order.
21. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
30-/Sumit - Jitender//-
Whether Fit for Reporting: Yes / No
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
