Petitioner sought appointment as Live Stock Assistant by rectifying a category mistake from OBC to Outstanding Sports Person. Court held that since third party rights were already created via the published selection list, the writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3395/2020
Suresh Kumar Saini S/o Nathu Ram Saini, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Ponkh, Dhani Dawwala, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Vikas Jakhar. |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Swapuil Singh for Mr. N.G. Narain. |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
28/07/2020
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayer:-
“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may very graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to:
I Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Live Stock Assistant by correcting his category from ‘No ‘ to ‘Yes’ in Outstanding Sports Person Category.
II Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be
(2 of 4)
[CW-3395/2020]
directed to consider Sports Certificates of the petitioner. III Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be directed to if the petitioner find place in merit then give appointment to him on the post of Live Stock Assistant as the third party right has not been made.
IV Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be directed to give same benefits as has been given in the case of Kavita Choudhary Vs. The Registrar (Exam) & Anr. (DBSAW No, 1700/2017), decided on 01.11.2017. V Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon’ble High Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner. VI Cost of the writ petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioner.”
Brief facts of the case are that the respondents issued an advertisement on 14.03.2018 for selection on the post of Livestock Assistant. Pursuant to the advertisement the petitioner applied for the said post under the OBC-(NCL) Category, however the petitioner belongs to Outstanding Sports Person Category. The result of the said exam was declared by the respondents on 17.01.2020 thereafter the petitioner realized his mistake and submitted an application for changing his category. The select list under the category of Outstanding Sports Persons was published by the respondents on 10.07.2020.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for changing his category from OBC-(NCL) to Outstanding Sports Persons. Counsel for petitioner submits that the mistake committed by the petitioner was a bona fide one and he may be permitted to rectify his mistake. In support of his contention counsel relied upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this court in the matter of Kavita Choudhary vs. The Registrar (Examination) Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur & Anr. , (D.B.
(3 of 4)
[CW-3395/2020]
Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1700/2017) decided on
01.11.2017, where in paras 8, 9 &10 it has been held as under:-
9. The difference in the two mistakes would be that whereas rectification of the first would cause no prejudice, rectification of the second would cause a prejudice.
10. We find in the decisions dated 31.07.2013 in D.B. S.A.W. No.875/2012, State of Rajasthan Vs. Dater Singh, dated in S.B.C.W.P. No.7159/2017, Dinesh Kumar Mahawar VS. RPSC & Ors. dated 27.01.2017 in S.B.C.W.P. No.906/2017, Shimla Jat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., dated 24.11.2016 in S.B.C.W.P. No.15654/2016, Sapana Kumari Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. dated 31.07.2017 in W.P. (Civil) No.3721/2017j, Arkshit Kapoor VS. Union of India & Ors., dated 31.07.2017 in W.P. (Civil) No.11642/2016, Ajay Kumar Mishra Vs. Union of India & Ors passed by this Court and the Delhi High Court, the consistent view taken is that a bonafide mistake which does not affect a third party right should be allowed to be cured.”
Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the judgment passed in Kavita Choudhary (supra) will not help the petitioner as the petitioner himself was negligent and committed mistake while filling the application form under the OBC-(NCL) category. Counsel further submits that the result of the exam was declared on 17.01.2020 and this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on 17.02.2020 after declaration of the result and the select list under the Outstanding Sports Persons category has already been issued on 10.07.2020. Counsel further submits that now third party rights have been created, therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(4 of 4)
[CW-3395/2020]
I have carefully perused the record and also the judgment in the matter of Kavita Choudhary (supra) according to which where the third party rights have been created, the mistake cannot be cured as rectification of the same would cause prejudice to the third party.
Admittedly, the select list under the Outstanding Sports Persons Category has already been issued by the respondents on 10.07.2020.
In my considered view, since the third party rights have already been created, therefore change of category at this belated stage cannot be allowed by this Court.
In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to exercise the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
PREETI VALECHA /13
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a bonafide mistake in application form can be rectified when third party rights are already affected by the selection list.
Whether the court should exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 to allow category change after third party rights are created.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kavita Choudhary vs. The Registrar (Examination) Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur & Anr.Distinguished¶36
Kavita Choudhary vs. The Registrar (Examination) Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur & Anr. (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1700/2017)
State of Rajasthan Vs. Dater SinghReferred¶29
D.B. S.A.W. No.875/2012, State of Rajasthan Vs. Dater Singh
Dinesh Kumar Mahawar VS. RPSC & Ors.Referred¶29
S.B.C.W.P. No.7159/2017, Dinesh Kumar Mahawar VS. RPSC & Ors.
Shimla Jat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Referred¶29
S.B.C.W.P. No.906/2017, Shimla Jat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Sapana Kumari Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Referred¶29
S.B.C.W.P. No.15654/2016, Sapana Kumari Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Arkshit Kapoor VS. Union of India & Ors.Referred¶29
W.P. (Civil) No.3721/2017, Arkshit Kapoor VS. Union of India & Ors.
Ajay Kumar Mishra Vs. Union of India & Ors.Referred¶29
W.P. (Civil) No.11642/2016, Ajay Kumar Mishra Vs. Union of India & Ors.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Suresh Kumar Saini
The State Of Rajasthan
Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Services Selection Board
The Director, Department Of Animal Husbandry
INDERJEET SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
