Disposed

Ashok Kumar v. State of Raj and Anr.

Rajasthan HC5 Oct 2016CW/1696/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of 26 writ petitions challenging the application of percentiles to marks obtained in the Rajasthan Public Service Commission examination. The bench observed that four different percentile formulas are not well-tested. Agreeing with the respondent, it directed the RPSC to call petitioners with actual marks exceeding the cut-off for the interview without excluding already called c

What did the court decide?

Directed RPSC to call petitioners who secured actual marks equal to or more than the cut-off for the interview without eliminating already called candidates and prepare the final merit list.

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Raj and Anr. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR

¶3

(1) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2626/2016

¶4

Shikha Sharma D/o Shri Bhikha Lal Sharma, aged about 31 years, by caste Brahmin, Resident of F-78, Mohan Nagar, behind S.D.M. Court, Hindaun City, District Karauli, Rajasthan (Roll No.114093)

¶5

..Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Secretariat, Jaipur – 302005 (Rajasthan)

¶8

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

(2) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.259/2016

¶11

1.Nand Singh Rathore S/o Shri Gopal Singh Rathore aged about 302/368, Jadaun Nagar-A, Durgapura, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶12

2.Prakash Kumar Khatri S/o Shri Mohan Lal aged about 38 years resident of Dr. V.C. Bhandari Ke Samne, Topkhana Ke Pass, Jalore (Raj.)

¶13

3.Lalita Jeengar S/o Shri Ramniwas Jeengar aged about 35 years resident of Mangri, Mohalla, Ward No. 12, Gangapur District Bhilwara (Raj.)

¶14

4.Narendra Pal Singh S/o Shri Taleram aged about 33 years resident of Rajasthan Gramin Bank, Kothi Rosevilla, Saras Hotel Bharatpur (Raj.)

¶15

5.Vikram Meena S/o Shri Sarvan Lal Meena aged about 30 years

¶16

¶17

resident of Qtr. 198, Type-III, Sector-3, Sadiq Nagar, New Delhi 6.Yogesh Tripathi S/o Shri Om Prakash Tripathi aged about 29 years resident of Outside of Chandpole Gate, Bihari Marg, Sikar (Raj.)

¶18

7.Darshan Shree Verma S/o Shri Rameshwar Dayal Verma aged about 35 years resident of VPO Surani, via. Jharli, Tehsil Srimadhopur District Sikar (Raj.)

¶19

.....Petitioners

¶20

Versus

¶21

1.State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶22

2.Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶23

....Respondents

¶24

(3) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.268/2016

¶25

1.Bhawani Singh Shekhawat S/o Sh. Sangram Singh Shekhawat, aged about 37 years, R/o C-291-292, Murlipura Scheme, Sikar Road, Jaipur-302039 (Raj.) (9602484848)

¶26

2.Ajay Khandal S/o Sh. Sanwar mal Sharma aged about 30 years, R/o Plot No. 354, 4-C, Jamnapuri, Murlipura, Jaipur (Raj.) )M9468673474 .....Petitioners

¶27

Versus

¶28

1.State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶29

¶30

2.Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶31

....Respondents

¶32

(4) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.619/2016

¶33

SHISHRAM DAMOLIYA S/O SHRI RAMKUMAR DAMOLIYA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, BY CASTE BALAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & POST KOLIDA, VIA KUDAN, TEHSIL & DISTRICT SIKAR (RAJ.).

¶34

...PETITIONER

¶35

VERSUS

¶36

THE SECRETARY, RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION RAJASTHAN, AJMER.

¶37

...NON-PETITINER

¶38

(5) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.977/2016

¶39

Kanhaiya Lal Balaee son of Mool Chand, aged about 36 years, resident of Basdi Jogiyan, post dabla, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶40

....Petitioner

¶41

Versus

¶42

1.The State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶43

2.The Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ajmer.

¶44

3.The Director (Prosecution), State of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶45

....Respondents

¶46

(6) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.986/2016

¶47

Mahesh Chandra Mourya son of Shri Sohan Lal Mourya, aged about 35 years, resident of Manoharpura Raigaron Ka

¶48

¶49

Mohallana, Post Jagatpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶50

....Petitioner

¶51

Versus

¶52

1.The State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶53

2.The Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ajmer.

¶54

3.The Director (Prosecution), State of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶55

.......Respondents

¶56

(7) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1001/2016

¶57

1.Meenu Bariwal D/o Shri S.R. Kataria, aged about 39 years, by caste Saini, Resident of B-62, Ganesh Nagar, New Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur, Rajasthan. (Roll No. 114281).

¶58

2.Praveen Kumar Karagwal S/o Shri Gopi Ram Karagwal, aged about 37 years, by caste Karagwal, Resident of VPO Phusewala Via Mirzewal, Village & Tehsil Karanpur, District Shriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Roll No.114240)

¶59

3.Kum. Laxmi Devi D/o Shri Sheetal Chand Jain, aged about 36 years, by caste Jain, R/o Bhandari Colony, Near S.B.B.J. Bank, Sayala, District Jalore, at present residing at 4/451, Pradhan Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. (Roll No. 114862).

¶60

4.Kapil Dev Sharma S/o Shri Satish Chandra Sharma, aged about 37 years, by caste Brahmin, Resident of ner Bus Stand Alwar, District Alwar, Rajasthan. (Roll No. 114013)

¶61

¶62

5.Kishore Kumar Fulwariya S/o Ghisu Lal Fulwariya, aged about 40 years, by caste Fulwariya, Resident of Jatiyo Ka Mohalla, Bhinmal, District Jallore, Rajasthan. (Roll No. 114678).

¶63

6.Ratan Kumar S/o Shri Ram Lal, aged about 38 years, Resident of Meghwalo Ka Bada Vas, Opposite Ramdev Temple, Nadol, Tehsil Desar, District Pali, Rajasthan. (Roll No. 114462).

¶64

....Petitioner

¶65

Versus

¶66

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan).

¶67

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶68

.......Respondents

¶69

(8) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1086/2016

¶70

1.Seema Vashistha D/o Shri Raghuveer Prasad aged about 33 years resident of Bankat Ku Kothi, Machari Chowk Rajgarh, District Alwar (Raj.)

¶71

2 Neha Surolia D/o Shri Manohar Surolia aged about 26 years resident of 125, Janakpuri-I, Imli Phatak, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶72

3.Hemlata Rathore D/o Shri Trilok Singh Rathore aged about 32 years resident of B-164, Dadi Ka Phatak, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶73

4.Kashika Singh D/o Raghuveer Singh aged about 29 years resident of Plot No. 105, Shiv Nagar-II, Murlipura, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶74

5.Vandana Nagar D/o Shri Madan Lal Nagar aged about 37

¶75

¶76

years resident of H.No. 12, Trilok Colony, Khetri Phatak, Kota (Raj.)

¶77

6.Ishwar Lal Koli S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Koli aged about 32 years, R/o Behind New Dadabari Mokshdham, Ward no. 36, Bhilwara (Raj.)

¶78

7.Sunil Jadiya S/o Sh. Ramdayal Jadiya, aged about 28 Years, R/o 3-G-30, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer (Raj.)

¶79

8.Neeraj Sharma S/o Shri Ramavtar Sharma aged about 34 Years resident\ of Village & Post Bonli, Tehsil Bonli, District Sawaimadhopur (Raj.)

¶80

....Petitioner

¶81

Versus

¶82

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan).

¶83

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶84

.......Respondents

¶85

(9) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1132/2016

¶86

Arvind Kumar Berwal son of Shri Gordhan Berwal, aged about 33 years, resident of Ward No. 17, Near Police Station, Mukangarh, Jhunjhunu District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan)

¶87

.....Petitioners

¶88

Versus

¶89

TheState of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶90

¶91

2.The Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ajmer.

¶92

3.The Director (Prosecution), State of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶93

....Respondents

¶94

(10) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1203/2016

¶95

Vineeta Rathore D/o Sh. Narendra Singh Rathore aged about 35 years, resident of 115/11 Shivpuri, Hathi Bhata, Ajmer (Rajasthan)

¶96

.....Petitioner

¶97

Versus

¶98

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No. 7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶99

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶100

..Respondents

¶101

(11) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1412/2016

¶102

Nirmala Meena D/o Shri Ramcharan Meena, aged about 37 years, by caste Meena, Resident of Plot No.98, Imliwala Phatak, Janakpuri-II, Jaipur, Rajasthan (Roll No. 114466).

¶103

.....Petitioner

¶104

Versus

¶105

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶106

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary,

¶107

¶108

Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶109

....Respondents

¶110

(12) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1542/2016

¶111

1.Surendra Singh Shekhawat S/o Shri Shyoji Singh Shekhawat aged 37 years R/o of Plot No. 101, Sector No. 2, New Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶112

2.Manoj Kumar S/o sh. Umrao Prasad Arya aged 36 years resident of Plot No. 104, Shriram Nagar Vistar, Kalwad Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶113

3.Vijay Bhardwaj s/o Ramesh Chandra Sharma aged about 37 years resident of Plot No. 365 Devi Nagar New-Sanganer road sodala, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶114

4.Dharmendra Kumar Awasthi S/o Shri Chaten Swroop Awasthi Taleram aged about 36 years resident of E-212, Bank Colony Murlipura Scheem, Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶115

.....Petitioners

¶116

Versus

¶117

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No. 7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶118

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶119

....Respondents

¶120

(13) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1696/2016

¶121

Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Ram Chandra, aged about 32 years, R/o Manjula Associates, Tilak Marg, New Colony, Jhunjhunu District Jhunjhunu.

¶122

.....Petitioner

¶123

Versus

¶124

State of Rajasthan through its Director of Prosecution, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶125

¶126

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer through its Secretary, Ajmer

¶127

....Respondents

¶128

(14) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1800/2016

¶129

1.Rakesh Pabri S/o Shri Gautam Kumar Pabri aged about 39 years resident of Pabri Bhawan, Hasanpura, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶130

2.Jeet Singh S/o Shri Foja Singh aged about 39 years resident of Village Band Ka Nagla District Bharatpur (Raj.)

¶131

3.Raju Bairwa S/o Shri Devi Lal Bairwa agd about 40 years resident of Wad No. 5, Near of Shiv Temple, Adarsh Nagar, Kuti Bandikui, District Dausa (Raj.)

¶132

4.Madhup Chouhan S/o Shri Sitaram Chouhan aged about 32 years resident of “Kamal Angan” Sunder Nagar, Jamalpura Road, Beawar District Alwar (Raj.)

¶133

.....Petitioners

¶134

Versus

¶135

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur -302005(Rajasthan)

¶136

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶137

....Respondents

¶138

(15) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2623/2016

¶139

Chandra Kant Chauhan S/o Rameshwar Singh R/o 22, Avadhpuri-I, Mahesh Nagar District Jaipur (Raj)

¶140

.....Petitioners

¶141

Versus

¶142

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur -302005(Rajasthan)

¶143

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary,

¶144

¶145

Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶146

....Respondents

¶147

(16) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3388/2016

¶148

Mahesh Lugria S/o Shri K.L. Lugria, aged 35 years, by caste Dhanka, R/o Plot No. 333, Vivek Vihar Colony, New Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur

¶149

.....Petitioner

¶150

Versus

¶151

State of Rajasthan, through its Director of Prosecution, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶152

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer through its Secretary, Ajmer

¶153

....Respondents

¶154

(17) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3391/2016

¶155

Jitendra Singh S/o Shri Mohan Singh, aged 35 Years, by-caste Rajput R/o 3-B, Ridhu Nagar-A, Niwaru Link Road, Niwaru, Jhotwara, Jaipur

¶156

.....Petitioner

¶157

Versus

¶158

State of Rajasthan, through its Director of Prosecution, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶159

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer through its Secretary, Ajmer

¶160

....Respondents

¶161

(18) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3408/2016

¶162

Rajni Kuba Daughter of Shri Vijay Chopra, Wife of Shri Saurabh Kuba, aged about 39 years, resident of 55, Patel Nagar, behind Ram Mandir, Hawa Sarak, 22 Godam, Civil Lines, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶163

.....Petitioner

¶164

Versus

¶165

State of Rajasthan, through Director, Department of

¶166

¶167

Prosecution, Room No. 7020, 7226, Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶168

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer (Raj.)

¶169

....Respondents

¶170

(19) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5418/2016

¶171

Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Shri Rajpal Meena, aged about 31 Years, R/o Village Bahadurpur, Post Bhopur, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli, at present R/o Plot No. 41, Jaipur Road, Near University Tiraha Kankarda, Bhonabay, Rasoolpura, Ajmer.

¶172

.....Petitioner

¶173

Versus

¶174

State of Rajasthan, through its Director of Prosecution, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶175

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer through its Secretary, Ajmer

¶176

....Respondents

¶177

(20) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6941/2016

¶178

1.Kuldeep Singh Baroliya S/o Shanti Swaroop, aged about 40 years, R/o Jajau Basti, Atnai ke Pass, Hindaun City, Karauli, Rajasthan.

¶179

2.Ramesh Kumar Kararia S/o Prabhu Dayal, aged about 31 years, R/o E-III, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶180

3.Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Shimbhu Dayal Meena, aged about 32 years, R/o Village Singwana, Post Kukas, Via Amer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶181

4.Satish Kumar Verma S/o Ramswaroop Verma, aged about 38 years, R/o Village Dabla Mev, Post Machari, Rajgarh, Alwar.

.....Petitioners

Versus

The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶186

....Respondent

¶187

(21) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8078/2016

¶188

Rakesh Kumar S/o Bhonri Lal Bairwa, R/o 50A, Ishwar Bhawan, Plot No. 6, Bias-Godown, Jaipur.

¶189

.....Petitioner

¶190

Versus

¶191

State of Rajasthan, through its Director of Prosecution, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶192

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer through its Secretary, Ajmer

¶193

....Respondents

¶194

(22) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9922/2016

¶195

Raju Ram S/o Shri Paka Ram, aged about 38 years, by casteSargara, Resident of-GA, 35 Tagore Nagar Near Karni Mata Mandir Tehsil & District- Pali, Rajasthan (Roll No. 115301)

¶196

Versus

¶197

State of Rajasthan, through Director, Department of Prosecution, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶198

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶199

....Respondents

¶200

(23) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10600/2016

¶201

Yuduraj Mishra son of Vikash Chandra Mishra, by-caste Brahmin, residnet of D-52, Prem Colony, Nehru Nagar, Pani Pech, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶202

.....Petitioner

¶203

¶204

The State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶205

2.The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, through its Secretary, Ajmer.

¶206

3.The Director (Prosecution), State of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶207

....Respondents

¶208

(24) ,dy ihB O;ogkj ;kfpdk la[;k 1488@2016

¶209

jkds'k dqekj iq= Jh ikykjke mez 31 o"kZ fuoklh pkS/kjh dkWyksuh] fpMkok ftyk >qU>quwa ¼jktLFkku½

¶210

&&& ;kph

¶211

fo:)

¶212

1- jktLFkku jkT; }kjk izeq[k 'kklu lfpo x`g foHkkx] 'kklu lfpoky;] t;iqjA

¶213

2- jktLFkku yksd lsok vk;ksx] vtesj }kjk lfpo]

¶214

&&& izR;FkhZ

¶215

(25) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10106/2016

¶216

Anurag Choudhary S/o Shri Ummed Singh, aged about 28 years, R/o 156, Girnar Colony (South), Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.). .....Petitioner

¶217

Versus

¶218

1.State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan).

¶219

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶220

....Respondents

¶221

(26) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.14173/2016

¶222

Archana Sharma D/o Sh. Om Prakash Sharma, aged about 35 years, R/o Ward No.8, Doliya Ka Bass, Sikar-332001 (Raj.)

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan through Director, Department of Prosecution, Room No.7020, 7226 Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan)

¶227

Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

¶228

....Respondents

¶229

DATE OF ORDER : 05/10/2016

¶230

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

¶231

Mr.Girraj P. Sharma, ] Mr.Tanveer Ahmed ] Mr. Rakesh Kumar Saini ] Mr.Amit Singh Shekhawat ] Mr.Umesh Kumar Sharma ] Mr.Ajay Kumar Tanenia ] Mr.HV Nandwana ] Mr.Vedpal Shastri ] Mr.Surendra Singh Shekhawat ] Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat ] Mr.Sumit Jain ] Mr.Kawal Singh Loha ] Mr.Kamal Gupta ] Mr. Kuldeep Kumar Sharma ] Mr. Ram Pratap Saini ] Mr.Mahendra Sharma ] for petitioner/s Mr. Vigyan Shah ]

¶232

Dr. A.S. Khangarot, Addl. Government Counsel, for the State Mr. S.N. Kumawat, for respondent-RPSC Mr. M.F. Baig, for respondent/s

¶233

This bunch of writ petitions make a challenge to the result

¶234

of selection on the post of Assistant Prosecution Officer.

¶235

It is a case where written test for the post of Assistant

¶236

Prosecution Officer was scheduled and held on 18.10.2015. It

¶237

¶238

was conducted on-line. The petitioners and all other candidates had appeared in the written test on-line on 18.10.2015. Due to problem in the server at few centres, the on-line paper could not be attempted with required time thus Rajasthan Public Service Commission ( “RPSC” ) took a decision to allow such candidates to again appear in the written test and it was thereafter kept on 25.10.2015.

¶239

The majority of the candidates had appeared in the written test held on 18.10.2015 where no technical problem was existing i.e. server was working leaving few centres where server was not functional or having technical problem thus at 6 centres, the candidates could not attempt paper on-line. The RPSC had declared the result after written examination held on two different dates for the same papers. It was found that candidates appeared in the papers on 25.10.2015 seem to have secured more marks than candidates appeared in the examination on 18.10.2015 as percentage of successful candidates was more who appeared on 25.10.2015. After examination of the issue of difference of marks, a decision was taken to apply percentile system to assess difficulty level and to equate the marks of the candidates appeared in the examination on two different dates. On account of application of percentile, marks of those candidates, who appeared in the

¶240

¶241

written test on 25.10.2012, were reduced and, at the same time, increased in few cases. The petitioners have preferred these writ petitions to challenge the application of percentile as their marks have been reduced.

¶242

It was stated that there exist four different formulas of percentile thus cannot be considered to be a full proof and tested formula.

¶243

The argument on the issue was made by both the parties from time to time. The writ petitions were deferred on the last date with a direction to the counsel for RPSC to find out that if actual marks of the candidates, appeared in two papers on-line on 25.10.2015, are taken into consideration then how many candidates would be eligible for the interview based on cut-off marks already determined without eliminating those who have already been called. As per directions aforesaid, the RPSC made required exercise and informed that around 97 candidates may require to be called further. It is also stated that presently they have called 802 candidates for interview. It is three times to the post advertised.

¶244

Looking to the number given above, a request was made by learned counsel respondent-RPSC that instead of going in the legal issue and technicalities, a direction can be given by the court to call the petitioners, who appeared in the written

¶245

¶246

examination on 25.10.2015 and have secured more marks than the cut-off. The RPSC would carry out the directions. In doing so, the candidates already called for interview would not be excluded. The inclusion would be from and amongst those petitioners who have secured equal or more marks than cut-off. It would be considered on actual marks.

¶247

Learned counsel for petitioners have agreed to the aforesaid so as other parties. In view of the agreement aforesaid, writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions:

¶248

(i) The RPSC would call the petitioners for interview, who have secured equal or more actual marks than cut-off without eliminating those who have already been called for the interview.

¶249

(ii) In complying the directions above, the RPSC would be calling the candidates beyond three times but it would be as an exception in the present cases where an agreement has been made between the parties to avoid delay in the process of selection and even further litigation on the issue involved herein as validity in application of percentile has been doubted on many grounds which include availability of four different formula of percentile thus cannot be said to well tested

¶250

¶251

formula, otherwise, it would have been one.

¶252

(iii) The RPSC would, accordingly, prepare the final merit list after taking into consideration the actual marks of the main examination and interview.

¶253

(iv) If any candidate, not before this court, remains aggrieved by this order then would be at liberty to seek modification or recall of the order by moving an application before this court. In case of recall of the order, legal issue regarding application of percentile would be considered and decided by this court.

¶254

FRBOHRA

Ashok Kumar v. State of Raj and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar v. State of Raj and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Radhey Shyam Vs Subhash Chand Meena and Others

Aslam Khan Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Balveer Kaur and Others

Chetraj Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajwanti Devi and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp