This court dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner challenging a revised recruitment result where he was unselected despite having claimed errors in the answer key and arbitrary rejection in a previous appeal.
Dismissal of the writ petition as no case for interference was made out.
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. 1511/2013
Rajesh Kumar Gamot S/o Narayan Lal Gamot, Village Garhi Road, Post Paloda, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara
----Petitioner
Versus
Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary, Ajmer
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashish Kishore Saksena
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
25/07/2022
Application for early listing is allowed.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers;
“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may be 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 may kindly be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of PTI Grade-III according to the earlier result declared by the respondents. ii) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the answer of QUESTION NUMBER. 26 & 100 of PAPER-II OF SERIES ‘B’ for the post of PTI Grade-III be declared incorrect and the same be corrected as follows:- Paper-I (G.K.) of Series B Question Right No. Answer
(2 of 3)
[CW-1511/2013]
| 26 | Deleted |
|---|---|
| 100 | (2) |
iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the action of the respondents may kindly be declared by which they have declared the petitioner unsuccessful for the post of PTI Grade-III.
iv) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof thereby direct the respondents to constitute an independent committee of experts for rectifying the error committed in the answer key. v) Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon’ble 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.”
In pursuance to the advertisement dated 14.12.2011 the petitioner applied for the post of PTI Grade-II & III.
The grievance of the petitioner is that in the first result the petitioner was declared successful by the respondent(s) and in the revised result the respondent(s) have not selected the petitioner in an arbitrary manner.
The reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the RPSC wherein Para Nos. 3 & 4 it has been stated as under;
“3. That is also apparent from the record as petitioner himself has placed the copy of validated key as well as cut off of the result declared on dated 9.11.2012 as well as after report of the Experts about the disputed question on dated 19.01.2013 (Annexure-8) wherein cut off marks has been varied but the petitioner could not fall within even 3 time to the number of candidates, therefore, remained unselected.
(3 of 3)
[CW-1511/2013]
that the cut off marks of General Category are increased 272.01 marks whereas the petitioner has secured only 267.46 marks while in earlier result he was having more marks 269.92 marks but in both the results petitioner remained unselected,therefore, this writ petition is baseless and deserves to be dismissed summarily.”
Admittedly, the result of the examination in question was revised by the respondent(s) in pursuance to the order dated 18.12.2012 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20080/2012 (Satya Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.). The RPSC revised the result on account of which the cut-off marks of General Category was increased to 272.01 whereas the petitioner has secured only 267.46 marks.
In view of the fact that no less meritorious candidate has been selected and the result has rightly been revised by the respondent(s) in compliance of the order dated 18.12.2021 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20080/2012 (Satya Naryan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), no case is made out for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
CHETNA BEHRANI /70
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revised result excluding the petitioner was arbitrary under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Whether the grounds cited by the petitioner afford a case for interference in the matter of recruitment selection.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satya Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.Referred¶28
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20080/2012 (Satya Narayan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)
Article 226 of the Constitution of IndiaReferred¶29
Rajesh Kumar Gamot
Rajasthan Public Service Commission
Inderjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
