Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rajendra Kumar Daroga vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:5712) on 29 January, 2025

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:5712]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4146/2021

Rajendra Kumar Daroga S/o Shri Chootu Lal, Aged About 29
Years, R/o Village Rampura, Tehsil Phuliya Kalan, District
Bhilwara.
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       State       Of    Rajasthan,          Through          Secretary,     Ayurved
         Department,          Government            Of     Rajasthan,     Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
2.       Director,        Ayurved       Department,           Ashok    Marg,    Savitri
         College Circle, Ajmer.
3.       Dr.        Sarvepali       Radhakrishnan              Rajasthan       Ayurved
         University, Karward, Nagaur Road Jodhpur - Through Its
         Registrar.
4.       Ganga D/o Shri Chutra Ram, R/o Tehsil And District
         Jodhpur.
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)               :    Mr. Manoj Bohra
For Respondent(s)               :    Ms. Rakhi Choudhary for Mr.
                                     Himanshu Shrimali, AGC



               HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

29/01/2025

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following

relief:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed on behalf of petitioner that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and:-

I. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order-cum-show cause notice dated 26.02.2021 (Annex.5) passed by the respondent No.2 may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

[2025:RJ-JD:5712] (2 of 7) [CW-4146/2021]

II. Further by an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondents may be directed to restrain to displace the appointment of the petitioner.

III. Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent

department issued advertisement dated 06.10.2018 (Annex.1) for

the appointment on the post of Compounder/Nurse Junior Grade

as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani,

Homeopathy and Naturopathy Subordinate Services Rules, 1966.

In pursuance to the advertisement (Annex.1), the petitioner

submitted his application in the category of OBC(NC). The

respondent department issued the appointment order dated

12.02.2020 (Annex.3) and the petitioner's name was shown at Sr.

No.269. Subsequently, the petitioner was given posting in

Ayurvedic Hospital, Chandras, District Bhilwara vide order dated

16.02.2020 (Annex.4) and pursuant thereto the petitioner joined

the services. In the meanwhile the respondent no.4 (hereinafter

as 'private respondent') submitted a representation before the

respondent authority for considering her OBC (NC) Certificate

dated 26.06.2019, upon which the respondent authority reshuffled

the merit list and passed an order-cum-show cause notice dated

26.02.2021 (Annex.5) to the petitioner for cancelling his

appointment order on the ground that one candidate Ganga D/o

Chutra Ram has submitted her OBC (NC) Certificate of the year

2019 before the respondent authority, who is having higher marks

than the petitioner.

[2025:RJ-JD:5712] (3 of 7) [CW-4146/2021]

3. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner has filed the instant

writ petition.

4. Despite service nobody appears for respondent no.4 (private

respondent) in the instant writ petition. Though, Mr. Moti Singh

puts appearance on behalf of Ganga D/o Chutra Ram (respondent

no.4 in the instant writ petition) in the connected writ petition -

'Ganga v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., S.B. C.W.P.

No.6808/2021', but Mr. Moti Singh submits that he has no

instructions to appear in the instant writ petition on behalf of the

respondent no.4.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition

no. 9 (2) of the advertisement (Annex.1) clearly stipulates that

the requisite documents shall not be accepted after the cut off

date i.e, 05.11.2018. He also submits that the condition no.3 (iii)

of the advertisement stipulates that the OBC (NC) Certificate has

to be recent. He submits that initially the private respondent

submitted OBC (NC) Caste Certificate of the year 2013 along with

her application form, whereupon her candidature was not

considered in the OBC (NC) category, however, private

respondent later on submitted the OBC (NC) Caste Certificate of

the year 2019 on the basis of which the respondent authority has

cancelled the appointment of the petitioner and recommended

private respondent for the appointment. The learned Counsel has

placed reliance upon the judgment passed by a coordinate bench

of this Court in Kailash Ram v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

[S.B.C.W. No. 1746/2020 decided on 19.02.2020] and also

on a judgment passed by a division bench of this Court in Kailash

[2025:RJ-JD:5712] (4 of 7) [CW-4146/2021]

Ram v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. [S.A.W. No. 279/2020

decided on 04.09.2020].

6. Per contra, the counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 submits

that upon representation of the private respondent a committee

was constituted and on the basis of the recommendation of the

committee the appointment of the petitioner was cancelled and

the private respondent was appointed.

7. In the present case, a coordinate bench of this court passed

interim order dated 15.03.2021 in the following terms:

"Issue notice. Issue notice of stay application also, returnable within six weeks.

Meanwhile, petitioner's appointment on the post of Compounder (Ayurved), shall not be cancelled."

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

9. This Court finds that firstly, the advertisement dated

06.10.2018 (Annex.1) lays down a specific condition that the

caste certificate of the candidates claiming the benefit of

reservation must be a recent one. The condition 3 (iii) of the

advertisement (Annex.1) is reproduced as under:

"अन्य पिछड़ा वर्ग/अति पिछड़ा वर्ग के प्रमाण-पत्र में निवास स्थान एवं कीमीलेयर /नॉन कीमीलेयर की प्रविष्टिया सही-सही एवं पूर्ण भरी गई है । अन्य पिछडा वर्ग / अति पिछड़ा वर्ग के जाति प्रमाण-पत्र नियमानस ु ार नवीनतम जारी किये हुए होने आवष्यक है ।"

10. Secondly, it is seen that as per condition no. 9 (2) of the

advertisement (Annex.1), any certificate which has been issued

after the last date of filling the application form for the post of

Compounder/Nurse Jr. Grade, will not be considered valid for the

said post in the advertisement (Annex.1). The condition no. 9 (2)

of the advertisement (Annex.1) is reproduced as under:

[2025:RJ-JD:5712] (5 of 7) [CW-4146/2021]

"(2) आवेदन करने की अन्तिम तिथि के बाद जारी किया गया कोई भी प्रमाण पत्र मान्य नहीं होगा।"

11. Thirdly, upon perusal of the order-cum-show cause notice

dated 26.10.2021 (Annex.5), it is reflected that as the caste

certificate dated 12.04.2013 submitted by the private respondent

at the time of filling of the application form expired on

11.04.2016, she was asked to submit the caste certificate again,

upon which OBC (NC) Caste Certificate dated 26.06.2019 was

submitted by her. This Court finds that in view of the condition no.

9 (2) laid down in the advertisement (Annex.1), the certificate

dated 26.06.2019, which was submitted by the private

respondent, could not be taken into consideration by the

respondent authorities, while considering the eligibility of the

private respondent, inasmuch as the certificate dated 26.06.2019

was issued beyond the cut-off date prescribed for filling the

application from, i.e. 05.11.2018. The condition 1(i) of the

advertisement (Annex.1) which prescribes the cut-off date, is

reproduced as under:

"1) आवेदन करने की अंतिम तिथि :-

i) ऑनलाईन आवेदन पत्र दिनांक 05-11-2018 को मध्य रात्रि 12.00 बजे तक भरे जा सकेंगे। इसके उपरान्त ऑनलाईन लिंक स्वतः ही निष्क्रिय हो जायेगा। (नियुक्ति प्राधिकारी को विषेष परिस्थितियों में उक्त तिथियों में परिवर्तन करने का पर्ण ू अधिकार होगा।)"

12. The Condition No.9 (2) of the advertisement specifically

mandates that any certificate which is issued subsequent to the

last date of submission of application form shall not be considered

as valid. Therefore, in any case the caste certificate dated

26.06.2019 submitted by the private respondent should not have

been considered so as to consider her candidature in the category

[2025:RJ-JD:5712] (6 of 7) [CW-4146/2021]

of OBC (NC) Women. Further, the caste certificate dated

12.04.2013 was valid only for a period of three years as per the

Circular dated 24.01.2013 issued by the Social Justice and

Empowerment Department, Government of Rajasthan. As per this

circular, an OBC (NC) Caste Certificate shall be valid for three

years from the date of issuance on the basis of the affidavit of the

holder of such certificate in this behalf. The relevant part of the

circular dated 24.01.2013 is reproduced as under:

"vU; fiNM+k oxZ@fo'ks"k fiNM+k oxZ izek.k i=

1- vf/kd`r vf/kdkjh & laHkkxh; vk;qDr@vfrfjDr laHkkxh; vk;qDr@ftyk dyDVj ,oa ftyk eftLVªsV@vfrfjDr ftyk dyDVj ,oa vfrfjDr ftyk eftLVªsV ¼iz'kklu@'kgj½@mi ftyk dyDVj ,oa mi ftyk eftLVªsV@lgk;d dyDVj ,oa dk;Zikyd eftLVªsV@jktLo vf/kdkjh tks rglhynkj@uk;c rglhynkj ls de in dk ugha gks tgka mEehnokj rFkk mldk ifjokj jgrk gSA 2- fØehys;j esa ugha gksus laca/kh izek.k i= ,d o"kZ ds fy, ekU; gksxkA ,d ckj fØehys;j esa ugha gksus dk izek.k i= tkjh gksus ds mijkUr vxj izkFkhZ vkxkeh o"kZ esa Hkh fØehys;j esa ugha gS rks ,slh fLFkfr esa mlls lR;kfir 'kiFk i= ysdj ¼ifjf'k"B&th½ iwoZ esa tkjh izek.k i= dks gh eku fy;k tkosA ,slk vf/kdre rhu o"kZ rd fd;k tk ldrk gSA 3- vkschlh laca/kh izek.k i= ,d ckj gh tkjh fd;k tkosxkA ijUrq fØehys;j esa ugha gksus laca/kh rF; dks rhu o"kZ ds fy, izkFkhZ ds fof/k lEer 'kiFk i= ds vk/kkj ij ekU;rk nh tk;sxhA fuEu ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa nqckjk izek.k i= tkjh fd;k tk;sxkA ¼v½ izek.k i= xqe tks tkus] dV QV tkus ;k [kjkc gks tkus ij nksgjh izfr ¼Duplicate copy½ tkjh dh tkosA ¼c½ uke cnyus ij la'kksf/kr izek.k i= ¼ Revised Certificate½ tkjh fd;k tkosA ¼l½ dkykUrj esa vk;q o`f) ds vuqlkj igpku ds fy, ekax ij u;s QksVks ds lkFk uohuhd`r izek.k i= ¼Renewed Certificate½ tkjh fd;k tkosxkA"

Further, the report of the Committee dated 02.03.2020 as

available on record in SBCWP No.6808/2021 (connected with the

SBCWP No.4146/2021) also reflects the fact that the caste

certificate dated 12.04.2013 was valid for only three years. Also,

the condition no.3 (iii) of the advertisement (Annex.1) clearly

reflects that the caste certificate ought to be recent certificate,

[2025:RJ-JD:5712] (7 of 7) [CW-4146/2021]

having no ambiguity in it. The private respondent at the time of

filling the application form and while submitting the caste

certificate dated 12.04.2013 was well aware not only of the

conditions laid down in the advertisement but also of the fact that

she was not having eligibility to be considered in OBC (NC)