The petitioner challenged the rejection of his candidature due to alleged errors in the answer key of a 2010 civil court exam. The court dismissed the writ petition citing the eight-year delay and the initiation of subsequent selection processes in 2014-2015.
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. 131/2018
Rampratap Meena S/o Shri Kalu Ram Meena, aged about 45 years, By Caste Meena, R/o P.B. 8, Near Bus Stand, Green Park Colony, Tehsil Chhabra, District Baran, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Dr. V.B. Sharma, AAG Mr. Nitin Jain, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
17/10/2022
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayer:-
“It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may most gracious enough to accept and allow this writ petition, and-
(a) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature thereof and thereby direct the respondent to constitute a Expert Committee for examination of the question no.60, 74 & 82 of A-Series of Paper of Subject Geography, as the wrong answers of these questions were considered as a right answers;
(b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature thereof and thereby direct the respondents to award marks to the petitioner for question no. 60, 74 & 82 and deleted question no. 73 of Series-A of the subject Geography Paper Exam 2010
(2 of 2)
[CW-131/2018]
and after that if the petitioner found eligible otherwise then he may kindly be given appointment on the post of College Lecturer ST Category male;
(c) Any other appropriate writ, order or directions deemed just and proper by this Hon’ble Court may also be passed in favour of the petitioners and in the interest of justice.”
In pursuance to the advertisement dated 21.09.2010, the petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer College Education.
Grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have rejected the candidature of the petitioner on account of issuing the wrong answer key by them and the petitioner has disputed the answers mentioned by the respondents in their answer key.
Counsel for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted that the advertisement in question relates to the year 2010 and thereafter the fresh selection process was also initiated in the year 2014-2015 and the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the answer key which pertains to the advertisement in the year 2010 after a delay of eight years.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and also considering the fact that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition after a delay of eight years and considering the fact that subsequent selection process has also been initiated by the respondents in the year 2014-2015 for the post in question, hence in my view, no relief can be granted to the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
JYOTI /94
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging the answer key of a 2010 examination can be entertained after a delay of eight years where a new selection process was initiated in 2014.
Rampratap Meena
The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer
Secretary, College Education Department, Jaipur
Inderjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
