Allowed

Rahul Meena S/O Omprakash Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 May 2024CW/2039/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition by a Constable recruit who was passed in the Physical Standard Test but denied appointment due to category relaxation limitations. The Court held that since the authorities failed to disclose the relaxation, the candidate was deprived of an appeal right. The petitioner was directed to a re-examination and, if qualified without relaxation, granted appointment

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider petitioner's height as 168 cm, grant re-examination, and appoint him with seniority benefits from the date the next lower merit candidate is appointed.

Rahul Meena S/O Omprakash Meena Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2039/2019

¶4

Rahul Meena S/o Omprakash Meena, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Vpo Barodakan, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur

¶8

The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur 3. The Inspector General Of Police (Recruitment), Rajasthan, Jaipur

¶9

The Superintendent Of Police, Jaisalmer

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini Mr. Aamir Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pradeep Kalwania, GC with Mr. Shivam Chauhan

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order

¶13

24/05/2024

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner was declared successful in the Physical Standard Test (for short 'the PST') but has not been accorded appointment. Counsel further submits that when the petitioner enquired from the respondent Office that why he had been denied appointment even though he has qualified the PST? The respondents informed him that he had been declared qualified in the PST on the basis of relaxation given to the Scheduled Castes (for short ‘the SC’) and Scheduled Tribes (for short ‘the ST’) category candidates and therefore, he can only be given appointment after exhausting the other candidates who have been declared qualified in the PST without relaxation as per the mandate of Rule 14(2) of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (for short 'the

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

(2 of 9)

Rules of 1989'). Counsel further submits that while conducting the PST on 08.09.2018, the petitioner was declared passed without disclosing the exact measurement of his height by the respondents and if the respondents would have disclosed him that he had been declared pass in the PST on the basis of relaxation, he could have preferred an appeal as provided under the terms and conditions of the advertisement, as the petitioner is having height of 168 cm or above. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has been deprived of an opportunity of getting correct measurement by filing an appeal and is also deprived from the appointment to the post of Constable pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.05.2018 against the vacancies for District Jaisalmer.

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that during recruitment to the post of Constable (GD), CAPFs for the year 2013-14 for which the petitioner's height was measured as 168.1 cm and in compliance of the interim order of this Court dated 20.09.2022, his height as measured by the Medical Board, AIIMS, Jodhpur, was found to be 168 cm and the requirement of height for appointment to the post of Constable for the year 2018 is also 168 cm. Thus, the petitioner who qualified the PST without any relaxation, is entitled for appointment on the basis of his own merit.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that height of the petitioner was correctly measured during the PST and he has been declared passed on the basis of relaxation clause for the SC/ST candidates. Counsel further submits that as per the

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

(3 of 9)

provisions of Rule 14(2) of the Rules of 1989, in the first chance the candidates of SC and ST who have been declared passed without seeking any relaxation in the physical standard, are considered for appointment and after exhausting them, if vacancies still remained unfilled then only the candidates who have been declared passed on the basis of relaxation, are considered for appointment. If the petitioner was declared qualified in the PST, his candidature could not be considered for appointment at a first instance and lateron no vacancies remained unfilled and therefore, he could not be given appointment. Counsel further submits that the recruitment process is over and therefore, he could not challenge the same. Counsel further submits that no vacancies for District Jaisalmer is available and therefore the petitioner cannot be given appointment. He also submits that the petitioner was disclosed about his height measured during the PST and he was having an opportunity of appeal if aggrieved by the measurement but he did not file the appeal and therefore now he cannot challenge the same.

¶25

Considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents and perused the documents available on record.

¶26

The facts in brief of the matter are that the respondents issued an advertisement dated 20.05.2018 for inviting applications from eligible candidates for recruitment to the post of Constable (General/Operator/Driver/Horse Rider and Dog Squad).

¶27

The petitioner submitted online application form and participated in the recruitment process including the written

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

(4 of 9)

examination. The petitioner was declared qualified in the written examination and was issued an admit card for appearing in the PST scheduled to be held on 08.09.2018. The petitioner appeared in the PST and was declared as passed. Though, the petitioner was declared passed in the PST, he was not given appointment by the respondents in view of the provisions of Rule 14(2) of the Rules of 1989 which states that the candidates of SC and ST category who qualified the PST on the basis of relaxation provided to them can only be considered for appointment after exhausting the candidates who have been declared passed in the PST without seeking any relaxation.

¶32

After filing of this petition, the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide interim order dated 20.09.2022 directed the petitioner to appear before the Superintendent, AIIMS, Jodhpur for measurement of his height along with the copy of the order issued on 27.09.2022. The petitioner in compliance of the said order appeared before the Superintendent, AIIMS, Jodhpur and got medically examined for measurement of his height by the Board constituted. The Superintendent, AIIMS, Jodhpur after measuring the height of the petitioner under the impugned order of this Court submitted its report dated 10.03.2023 which is a part of the record of the case and as per that report, the height of the petitioner was found to be 168 cm.

¶33

The petitioner also participated in the recruitment to the post of Constable (GD), CAPF for the year 2013-14 wherein his height was also found to be 168.1 cm, as per the document annexed with the petition as (Annexure 5).

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

(5 of 9)

As per clause VIII of the advertisement dated 25.05.2018, the height required for recruitment to the post of Constable is 168 cm and as per Note No.1 below clause VIII, the candidate of SC and ST is relaxed by 5 cm. However, such candidates could be considered for appointment only in case the candidates without seeking any relaxation in the physical standards are not available.

¶38

The petitioner appeared in the recruitment process to the post of Constable pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.05.2018 and during the PST held on 08.09.2018 he was declared passed. If the respondents would have disclosed the petitioner that his height was found as 167.8 cm and he has been declared PST passed on the basis of relaxation available to the SC/ST candidates, he having height as 168 cm or above, could have preferred an appeal as provided under the terms and conditions of the advertisement but since the petitioner has been declared PST passed, there was no occasion for him to file an appeal. Since the petitioner was having height of 168 cm and also when appeared in other recruitment, his height was measured as 168.1 cm, he might be under the impression that he has been declared passed in the PST without any relaxation and therefore, he did not file the appeal.

¶39

Under the impugned order of this Court, the Medical Board, AIIMS, Jodhpur on 10.03.2023 has measured the height of the petitioner as 168 cm. Also in the recruitment for the year 201314, his height was measured as 168.1 cm.

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

(6 of 9)

On the basis of aforesaid facts, this Court can very well say that the height of the petitioner was incorrectly measured during the PST conducted by the respondents on 08.05.2018. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that in the recent physical standard examination, the respondents have started the practice of mentioning that a candidate is declared passed in the PST mentioning if it was on the basis of relaxation. If the candidate is declared pass in the PST on account of relaxation then the respondents should specifically mention that he has been declared pass on the basis of relaxation so as to avoid any kind of misunderstanding.

¶44

While considering the similar issue as regards to same recruitment in case of Karan Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15/2019 decided on 26.02.2024 along with other connected matters, this Court has

¶45

considered and passed an order as under:-

¶46

“8. The required Physical Standard Test for recruitment to the Post of Constable is mentioned in subclause VIII of Clause 8 of the said advertisement, which is quoted as under:-

¶47

“(Viii) “kkjhfjd ekin.M+&

¶48

jktLFkku iqfyl v/khuLFk lsok fu;e 1989 ds fu;e&14 ds vuqlkj vH;fFkZ;ksa dh ÅapkbZ lhus dk eki ,oa otu fuEukuqlkj gksuk vfuok;Z gS%&

¶49

ekin.M	LkkekU	; {ks=	ckjka ftys ds lg ds fy, ekin.M	fj;k vkfnokfl;ksa
	iq:’k	efgyk	iq:’k	efgyk
U;wure ÅpkbZ	168 ls-eh-	152 ls-eh-	160 ls-eh-	145 ls-eh-
lhuk ¼dsoy iq:’kksa ds fy,½	fcuk Qqyk,s&81 ls-eh- Qqykus ij&86 ls-eh- ¼lhus dk	Ykkxw ugha	fcuk Qqyk,s&74 ls-eh- Qqykus ij&79 ls-eh- ¼lhus dk	Ykkxw ugh
	Qqyko de ls de 5 ls- eh-½		Qqyko de ls de 5 ls- eh-½
otu ¼dsoy efgykvksa ds fy,½	Ykkxw ugha	47-5 fd-xzk-	Ykkxw ugh	43 fd-xzk-

(7 of 9)

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

uksV&

1- ;fn lkekU; {ks= ds fy, mijksDr of.kZr “kkjhfjd ekin.Mksa ds vuqlkj vuqlwfpr tkfr@vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds vH;FkhZ miyC/k ugha gksrs gSa rks mUgsa ÅapkbZ o lhus esa 5 ls-eh- dh NwV ns; gksxhA

¶55

2- igkMh ,oa vkfnoklh {ks= ds vH;fFkZ;ksa ds fy, fu;e&14¼2½ jktLFkku iqfyl v/khuLFk lsok fu;e 1989 ds vUrxZr ekin.M gksaxsA

¶56

(iX)fpfdRldh; ekin.M

¶57

¼1½ vH;FkhZ dh nksuksa vka[kksa dh n`f’V 6x6 fcuk p”es ds gksuk vfuok;Z gSA

¶58

¼2½ vH;FkhZ ekufld :i ls tkx:d] lqn< LokLF; okyk ,oa lHkh “kkjhfjd fodkjksa] nks’kksa] jksxksa ls eqDr gksuk pkfg,A vH;FkhZ ekufld :x.krk ls xzLr ugha gksuk pkfg,A ¼3½ vH;FkhZ ds ?kqVus vkil esa Vdjkus (knock-knee), ulsa Qwyh gqbZ gksuk (varicose veins), HkSaxkiu (squint), jrkSa/kh (night blindness), jax nf’V nks’k (colour blindness), gdykdj cksyuk (stammering), iSj (flat foot), lery ;k vU; dksbZ fod`fr tks drZO; ikyu esa ck/kd gks (any other deformity) ugha gksuh pkfg,A”

¶59

9. After having been participated in the PET/PST Test, the petitioners were declared successful in the test, however, they were not accorded appointment by the respondents on the ground that they were declared successful in PET/PST Test on the basis of relaxation being provided to the SC/ST candidates as provided under Note 1 of sub-clause VIII of Clause 8 of the advertisement.

¶60

10. Sub-clause 1 of Clause 11 of the said advertisement provides for an appeal by a candidate aggrieved by the physical measurement conducted by the respondents on submitting requisite fee of Rs.500/- on the very same day of his physical standard examination. On filing of such an appeal, the re-examination of the candidates is conducted.

¶61

11. Sub-clause 1 of Clause 11 of the advertisement is quoted as under:-

¶62

ß“kkjhfjd ekiÙkkSy (Physical Standard Test/PST)-

¶63

lEcfU/kr ftyk@;wfuV@cVkfy;u dh inokj@oxZokj@efgyk@iq:’k fjfDr;ksa ds ikapxq.kk vH;fFkZ;ksa ¼cS.M in ds leLr vH;FkhZ½ dks “kkjhfjd eki&rkSy (PST) gsrq cqyk;k tk,xkA fu;ekuqlkj xfBr HkÙkhZ cksMZ }kjk “kkjhfjd eki&rkSy esa ;ksX; ik, x;s vH;fFkZ;ksa dh “kkjhfjd n{krk ijh{kk vk;ksftr dh tkosxhA HkrhZ cksMZ PST esa mifLFkr leLr vH;fFkZ;ksa dks muds ekirkSy ls voxr djk;sxkA [ksy dksVs ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks egkfuns”kd iqfyl }kjk i`Fkd ls xfBr [ksy HkrhZ cksMZ }kjk “kkjhfjd ekirkSy ds fy, vyx ls cqyk;k tk;sxkA vihy& “kkjhfjd ekirkSy esa vlQy jgs vlUrq’V vH;FkhZ HkrhZ cksMZ ds le{k fu/kkZfjr izfØ;kuqlkj udn :i;s 500&@”kqYd tek djkdj mlh fnu vihy dj ldrk gSA ijh{kkFkhZ ;fn vihy ij “kkjhfjd ekirkSy esa lQy jgrk gS rks mlls fy;k x;k “kqYd okil djrs gq, mls p;u izfØ;k esa “kkfey fd;k tkosxkA vlQy jgus dh fLFkfr esa ;g “kqYd okil ugha fd;k tkosxkA vihy dh fØ;kfUofr ds fy, HkrhZ cksMZ ds lkFk ,d jktdh; fpfdRld jgsxk] vihy mlh fnu iw.kZ dh tkosxhA uksV& vihy ds lEcU/k esa HkrhZ cksMZ }kjk fy;k x;k fu.kZ; vfUre gksxkAÞ

¶64

12. Since the petitioners were declared successful in PET/PST Test without mentioning in the result-sheet that they have been declared successful on the basis of relaxation provided for the SC/ST Category candidates, there was no occasion for them to file an appeal. If the respondents would have mentioned in the result -sheet that the petitioners have been declared successful in the PET/PST Test on the basis of relaxation as allowed to the SC/ST candidates, they would have also filed an appeal because they submit that they fulfill the required physical standard without any relaxation and the

(8 of 9)

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

respondents have incorrectly measured their heights and chest expansion.

¶69

13. It has also been brought to the notice of the Court that in the recent physical standards examination, the respondents have adopted the practice of mentioning that a candidate is declared passed in the PET/PST Test on the basis of relaxation or not. The respondents have to clarify those candidates who are being declared successful in the PET/PST Test on the basis of relaxation or without relaxation and if any candidate is declared successful with relaxation and he is aggrieved, he may prefer an appeal, meaning-thereby, the respondents themselves have realized this that the candidates who are declared successful in PET/PST Test on the basis of relaxation without there being any such mentioning in the result-sheet, they are deprived of their opportunity of appeal and for that the respondents have adopted this new method of declaring the result of PET/PST Test by mentioning that a candidate belonging to SC/ST Category declared passed on the basis of relaxation or without relaxation.

¶70

14. On consideration of over all facts as stated above, this Court finds that a candidate of SC/ST Category, though has been declared passed in PET/PST Test but with relaxation is not considered for appointment until and unless all those candidates of SC/ST Category are given appointment who have been declared pass in PET/PST Test without any relaxation even in case they are lower in merit to the candidates who have been declared successful in PET/PST Test on the basis of relaxation.

¶71

15. This Court feels that declaring a candidate of SC/ST Category passed in PET/PST Test without mentioning this fact that he has been passed on the basis of relaxation certainly deprives that candidate from submitting his appeal as provided under the recruitment process. In such circumstances, it would be justifiable to provide an opportunity of re-examination of physical standard to the petitioners by submitting an appeal to the respondents now alongwith requisite fee so that they can get proper opportunity as they are claiming that they are having the physical standard as required as per the condition of the advertisement for claiming any relaxation.

¶72

16. Accordingly, the present writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to allow the opportunity of re-examination of physical standard to the petitioners for which they shall appear before the Additional Director General of Police (Recruitment) on 19.03.2024.

¶73

17. On depositing the requisite fee of Rs.500/-, the respondents shall got conduct re-examination of physical standard of the petitioners by a Medical Board constituted by Superintendent of SMS Medical College & Hospital, Jaipur. In case the petitioners are declared successful for the physical standard examination without providing them any relaxation as allowed to the SC/ST Candidates, they shall be considered for the appointment on the basis of their merit with all

(9 of 9)

[2024:RJ-JP:24976]

[CW-2039/2019]

consequential benefits, including seniority etc. and shall be placed and treated as appointed from the date any candidate lower in merit to them has been given appointment.

¶78

18. It is made clear that the petitioners shall be entitled for the notional benefits for the intervening period.”

¶79

Counsel for the respondents also submitted that since no advertised vacancies are available for the District Jaisalmer, the petitioner cannot be allowed any relief.

¶80

If a candidate is deprived of his right of seeking Government employment and Court comes to the conclusion that such candidate has been illegally deprived, then Courts are duty bound to grant relief to such candidate.

¶81

On a query put to the Government Counsel for such a situation, he suggested that the Government can create shadow posts.

¶82

In view of discussions made above, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the height of the petitioner as 168 cm and shall consider the case of the petitioner and shall give appointment to him as per his merit with all consequential benefits including seniority etc. He shall be placed and treated appointed from the date any candidate lower in merit to him has been given appointment.

¶83

It is made clear that the petitioner shall be entitled only for the notional benefits for the intervening period.

¶84

Since the main petition has been disposed of, the stay application and pending application/s, if any, also stand/s disposed of.

¶85

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶86

Satyendra/363

Rahul Meena S/O Omprakash Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Meena S/O Omprakash Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banwari Vs State

Makkhan Vs State

Jitendra Kumar Ct (Driver) NO.367 S/O Shri Durga Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Chander Ram @ Ram Chander and Ors. Vs State

Neetu Kanwar D/O Shri Laxman Singh Rathore Vs State of Rajasthan

Surya Prakash Sharma and Anr. Vs State Panchyati Raj Depors