The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an amendment to selection rules for the post of Compounder-Nurse Junior. The Court held that selection based on qualifying examination marks is a rational mode of selection within the State's policy discretion and rejected the plea of arbitrariness.
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 AT JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14311/2021
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ritu Raj Singh Rathore. For Respondent(s) : ---
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Order
18/10/2021
The petitioners have challenged Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Ayurvedic Unani Homeopathy and Naturopathy Subordinate Service Rules as amended in the year 2015. In short, the case of the petitioners is that prior to the amendment, the Rule in question provided for selection to the post of Compounder-Nurse Junior grade on the basis of a competitive examination of all the qualified candidates. However, by virtue of the amended Rule 19,
(2 of 2)
[CW-14311/2021]
selection for the said post is to be made on the basis of marks secured by the candidates in the qualifying examinations.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, we do not find any merit in the petition. What would be the appropriate mode of selection for the post in question is essentially a matter of policy within the discretion of the employer. As long as such policy is rational and cannot be attacked on the ground of being arbitrary or irrational, the Court would not substitute its wisdom for that of the authority. Marks secured by the candidates at the qualifying examination is one of the perfectly legitimate and often used mode for selection in public employment.
Additionally, we also find that this very petitioner had earlier approached this Court and petition has been dismissed as stated by the petitioners in paragraph 10 of the petition. In this paragraph, the petitioners have neither given the date of the order nor the writ petition number, which was dismissed earlier. The petitioners should have given such details and also produced the copy of the order of the Court.
Be that as it may, the petition is dismissed for the reasons noted above.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J
(AKIL KURESHI),CJ
14-jayesh/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the amendment to Rule 19 selecting candidates based on qualifying examination marks is arbitrary or irrational.
Whether the State has the policy discretion to change the mode of selection for public posts.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dushyant Singh
Manoj Kumar Panwar
Inder Singh
State Of Rajasthan
Akil Kureshi
Sandeep Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
