Dismissed

Prem Sukh Jat S/O Shri Ram Chandra Jat v. State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary

Rajasthan HC12 Dec 2018CW/25736/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench dismissed a writ petition filed by candidates who failed to participate in the Physical Standard Test and Physical Efficiency Test for the post of Constable in Rajasthan Police. The court held that the advertisement mandated checking the police website for updates, there was ample time to download admit cards, and granting relief would disrupt ongoing training schedules.

What did the court decide?

null

Prem Sukh Jat S/O Shri Ram Chandra Jat Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 25736/2018

¶3

Prem Sukh Jat S/o Shri Ram Chandra Jat, Aged About 23 Years, By Caste- Jaat, R/o Nevar Bag Balaji Agency Deoli, Dist.- Tonk (Raj.) Pincode-304804, (For The Post Of Constable Driver. Non Tsp, Application Id-201804693383, Roll No.4026780)

¶4

Pankaj Kumar S/o Shri Rothash Kumar, Aged About 23 Years, By Caste- Meena, R/o Village-Kaman, Post-Bhojan, Teh.-Rajgarh, Dist.- Churu (Raj.) Pincode-331301, (For The Post Of Constable Gen. Non Tsp, Application Id201803754146, Roll No.1023071)

¶5

Dinesh Bishnoi S/o Shri Ram Niwas Bishnoi, Aged About 25 Years, By Caste- Bishnoi, R/o Vpo-Rotoo, Teh.-Jayal, Dist.- Nagaur (Raj.) Pincode-341023, (For The Post Of Constable Gen. Non Tsp, Application Id-201804493553, Roll No.4173428)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj)

¶9

Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶11

Commandant, Hadi Rani Mahila Battalion, Ajmer-55, Ajmer (Raj.)

¶12

Superintendent Of Police, Jhunjhunu-17 (Raj.)

¶13

Superintendent Of Police, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. HC Kandpal for Mr. GS Gill, AAG

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

Order

(2 of 8)

[CW-25736/2018]

12/12/2018

This petition relates to candidates who applied for

¶22

recruitment as Constable under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate

¶23

Service Rules, 1989 (hereinafter ‘Rules of 1989’), pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.05.2018. All the petitioners having passed the written examination in terms of Rules of 1989 were required

¶24

to participate in the Physical Standard Test (PST) and Physical Efficiency Test (PET) on the date notified on the Police Department’s website indicated in the advertisement.

¶25

The case of the petitioners is that despite having

¶26

passed the written examination, the respondents did not inform

¶27

the date of PET/PST. Therefore, they could not download their

¶28

admit card to participate in PST/PET and resultantly were denied

¶29

consideration for appointment to the post of Constables in

¶30

Hadirani Battalion, Ajmer and in District Jhunjhunu

¶31

Mr.H.C. Kandpal, Asst. GC appearing for the

¶32

respondents submitted that instruction no.xiii in the advertisement

¶33

dated 25.05.2018 provides that “HkrhZ izfØ;k ls lEcfU/kr LFkkbZ vkns”k

¶34

la[;k&12@2018] 13@2018 fnukad 22-05-2018 ,oa foKfIr foHkkx dh csclkbZV

¶35

(3 of 8)

¶36

[CW-25736/2018]

¶37

www.recruitment2.rajasthan.gov.in / www.police.rajasthan.gov.in

¶38

ij miyC/k gSA HkrhZ ds lEcU/k esa le;≤ ij tkjh lwpuk Hkh osclkbV ij

¶39

miyC/k djkbZ tk,xhA” (as emphasized by Mr.H.C. Kandpal)

¶40

Mr.H.C. Kandpal submitted that the above instruction

¶41

clearly provides that all information pertaining to recruitment of

¶42

Constables in the recruitment of 2018 from time to time would be

¶43

made available on the website of the Police Department. He

¶44

submitted that admit cards of the successful candidates in the

¶45

written examination in respect of Hadirani Battalion, Ajmer were

¶46

uploaded on designated website on 4.09.2018 and the PST/PET for

¶47

the said Battalion were commenced on 7.09.2018 — a clear 3

¶48

(three) days later. Likewise, the admit cards of the successful candidates in written examination in respect of District Jhunjhunu

¶49

were uploaded on the designated website on 24.8.2018 and the

¶50

PST/PET for District Jhunjhunu were commenced on 29.8.2018 – a

¶51

clear 5 (five) days later.

¶52

Mr.H.C. Kandpal submitted that if inspite of the

¶53

information of the dates of PST/PET in various districts being

¶54

uploaded on the website of the Police Department as provided for

¶55

(4 of 8)

¶56

[CW-25736/2018]

¶57

in the instructions of the advertisement dated 25.05.2018, the

¶58

petitioners were remiss and lethargic because of their failure to

¶59

download the said information timely and for this reason were

¶60

unable to appear for the PST/PET on the due dates, they can have

¶61

no cause to agitate before this court.

¶62

Mr.H.C. Kandpal further submitted that a similar issue

¶63

came up before the Principal Seat at Jodhpur in the case of Ved

¶64

Prakash Versus State of Rajasthan & Others, SBCWP No.18065/2018 decided on 27.11.2018. Therein while dismissing

¶65

the petition the court held that as the requisite information with

¶66

regard to the holding of PST/PET was uploaded on the website of

¶67

the Police Department as indicated in instruction no.xiii of the

¶68

advertisement dated 25.05.2018, the respondent-Police

¶69

Department could not be held responsible for the failure of the petitioners to keep abreast with the available information as to the

¶70

dates of the PST/PET and be directed to provide another

¶71

opportunity for PST/PET to the petitioners. The court held that the

¶72

delay in downloading of information well in time could not be a

¶73

ground for interference. The court further held that “the

¶74

(5 of 8)

¶75

[CW-25736/2018]

¶76

petitioners cannot be heard to seek a specific personal information

¶77

in this regard from the respondents.”

¶78

Mr.H.C. Kandpal also submitted that aside of the

¶79

petitioners having no case on merit in view of the specific

¶80

instruction in the advertisement with regard to the obligation of

¶81

the candidates to keep abreast of the information of recruitment

¶82

process 2018 for the post of Constable from time to time on the

¶83

Police Department’s website indicated, this petition being filed

¶84

after a delay of about two month and 13 days, also liable to be

¶85

dismissed on the ground of laches. In this regard Mr.H.C. Kandpal

¶86

submitted that last of the PST/PET as per the original schedule

¶87

was held on 15.09.2018, result of successful candidates declared

¶88

and those successful appointed, the training of those so appointed

¶89

also commenced. The petitioners have belatedly approached this

¶90

court with delay without just cause and to grant indulgence to

¶91

them by directing a fresh PST/PET for them even in the absence of

¶92

just cause and legal ground would disrupt the whole training

¶93

schedule and confer on the petitioners an advantage of an adverse

¶94

situation of their own making by their sheer in-aptitude,

¶95

(6 of 8)

¶96

[CW-25736/2018]

¶97

carelessness and delay. Further the delay in approaching this court

¶98

infact indicates that the cases set up are a mere afterthought

¶99

intent on misusing the discretionary jurisdiction of this court.

¶100

Mr.Kandpal submitted that this court should not exercise it

¶101

discretionary jurisdiction in the facts as no equity for the petitioners can be found.

¶102

Heard. Considered.

¶103

Indeed instruction no.xiii of the advertisement dated

¶104

25.05.2018 provided that all candidates would be obliged to keep

¶105

abreast of information uploaded on the website of Police

¶106

Department with regard to the process/progress in the recruitment for the post of Constables in 2018. That instruction of

¶107

the advertisement is not under challenge before this court.

¶108

Consequently in determining the issue agitated by the petitioners

¶109

the aforesaid instruction will have to be taken into consideration.

¶110

The facts of the case on record indicate that following the

¶111

declaration of the result in the written examination the admit

¶112

cards of those candidates eligible to participate in the PST/PET in

¶113

Hadirani Battalion were uploaded on 4.9.2018 and PST/PET

¶114

(7 of 8) [CW-25736/2018]

¶115

commenced on 10.9.2018. There was clearly a gap of 3 (three)

¶116

days within which the admit cards could be downloaded by the

¶117

successful candidates for participating in the PST/PET at the notified place. Likewise, the admit cards of those candidates eligible to participate in the PST/PET in District Jhunjhunu were uploaded on 24.8.2018 and PST/PET commenced on 29.8.2018. There was clearly a gap of 5 (five) days within which the admit cards could be downloaded by the successful candidates for participating in the PST/PET at the notified place

¶118

I am of the considered view that there is no force in the petitioners’ case as there is nothing on record to even remotely

¶119

establish that the petitioners were in any manner obstructed technically or otherwise in failing to download—despite ample time

¶120

—their admit cards from the website of the Police Department. The petitioners therefore have no case on this count. Aside of the

¶121

aforesaid, as stated by Mr.H.C. Kandpal the final result for recruitment of Constable in various districts/batallions has been declared and appointments made. Those successful are already in

¶122

training. This delay in approaching the court also compounds the

¶123

(8 of 8)

¶124

[CW-25736/2018]

¶125

problem for the petitioners who as earlier held were themselves

¶126

responsible for not adhering to the instructions of the

¶127

advertisement and not downloading their admit cards for PST/PET,

¶128

despite adequate time for the purpose and participation being

¶129

available.

¶130

In the circumstances, no case of contravention of any

¶131

of their legal or fundamental rights made out in this petition.

¶132

The petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶133

(ALOK SHARMA),J

¶134

Prem Sukh Jat S/O Shri Ram Chandra Jat v. State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Sukh Jat S/O Shri Ram Chandra Jat v. State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhoj Raj Gurjar S/O Deep Chand Gurjar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Laxman Prasad Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Anil Kumar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Surendra Singh Shekhawat S/O Shri Umed Singh Shekhawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Kumar Meena S/O Shri Makkhan Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary

Phool Singh Gurjar S/O Shri Hargyan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Revenue Secretary