The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking restoration of 37 sports certificate marks and appointment as a Sub-Inspector. Relying on a coordinate bench decision that found the petitioner did not meet the cut-off even with disputed marks, the court held the petition rendered infructuous.
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. 1891/2022
Mona Prajapat D/o Rajuram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Bhutera Via Govindgah, Tehsil Chomu District Jaipur Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mrs. Sudesh Kasana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Maharshi, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
26/04/2022
Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers:-
“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that Your Lordships’ may graciously be pleased to admit and allow this writ petition; call for and examine entire record of the case and a) By an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to restore the ‘37’ marks of sports certificate for winning medal in individual or Team Events/ participated in National Games as mentioned in the original advertisement dated 23.12.2019.
b) By an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to disclose sports category wise cut off marks and also result
(2 of 4)
[CW-1891/2022]
of the candidates of the State and if the petitioner are found in merit as per their Sports (kabaddi Raider) category calol the petitioner for verification of documents and give appointment on merits with all consequential benefits.
c) Any other relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the petitioner.”
On 14.03.2022, this Court passed the following order:-
“Counsel for the respondents seeks two weeks’ time to file reply.
Time prayed for is allowed.
Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved in these writ petitions has been considered by the Coordinate Bench of this court at Principal Seat Jodhpur in the matter of Maya Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2076/2022) wherein on 21.02.2022, the following order was passed:-
“It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have issued the list of candidates, who has been called for document verification without indicating any particulars. Submissions have been made that neither the sports, to which the candidates have been selected, have been indicated nor the marks obtained by the candidates have been disclosed. Further submissions have been made that the candidates, though residence of other States, have also been selected regarding them also no indication has been made.
A copy of the writ petition has already been served to Mr.
[CW-1891/2022]
(3 of 4)
Manish Vyas, AAG, who prays for further time to complete his instructions in the matter. List the petition on 02.03.2022. On that date, the respondents shall produce the entire material pertaining to the order dated 25.01.2022 (Annex.8) issued by the respondents and the procedure, which has been adopted for the purpose of declaring the said list. The respondents may go ahead with the document verification, however, they shall not issue the orders of appointment, till the next date.”
In that view of the matter, list these writ petitions again on 29.03.2022. Meanwhile, the respondents may go ahead with the document verification, however, they shall not issue the orders of appointment, till the next date.
The Application No.1/2022 stands disposed of.”
Counsel for the respondents submits that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, at Principal Seat, Jodhpur has dismissed the writ petition in the matter of Maya Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2076/2022) decided on 19.04.2022, which reads as under:-
“This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the Standing Order No.3/2020 dated 18.01.2020 and the provisional selection list dated 25.01.2022 in relation to recruitment of Sports Person to the post of Sub-Inspector/Platoon Commander. The petitioner had questioned the reduction of the marks meant for participation in individual or team event in National Games/Senior National Championship/Open National Athletic Championship/National Inter-
(4 of 4)
[CW-1891/2022]
State Senior Athletic Championship/Federation Cup National Senior Championship/ National Cross Country Championship, from 37 as indicated in the advertisement, as per Standing Order dated 18.01.2020 (Annex.3) to 27.
In response to the writ petition, the respondents have produced the marks obtained by the petitioner and the cutoff in her category, wherein the petitioner has obtained 42.67 marks and the last selected candidate has obtained 63.33 marks.
In that view of the matter, even if the plea raised by the petitioner is accepted and the petitioner is awarded ten more marks, then the petitioner cannot make it to the cutoff. In that view of the matter, the petition filed by the petitioner has been rendered infructuous.
Dismissed accordingly.”
Counsel further submits that the petitioner has obtained 41.33 marks and the last selected candidate in her category has obtained 59 marks.
In that view of the matter, since no person less meritorious to the petitioner has been selected by the respondents, no cause of action survives.
Hence, the present writ petition stands dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
Upendra Pratap Singh /60
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow the petitioner's claim for restoration of sports certificate marks and appointment.
Whether to direct disclosure of sports category-wise cut-off marks and candidate results.
Mona Prajapat
State Of Rajasthan
Director General Of Police
Inderjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
