Sanjeev Kumar Tanwar Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sanjeev Kumar Tanwar Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who had applied under the 1998 Teacher Grade III advertisement/selection/recruitment process, is entitled to appointment or other relief at this belated stage, given that the selection and consequential appointments are complete, a fresh process has concluded leaving no vacant posts, and an identical lis has already been adjudicated in Om Prakash Ghiya (SBCWP No. 2706/2000).

Court's answer

Placing reliance on the ratio of the four cited Supreme Court decisions and on the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Personnel circulars dated 19.07.2001 (No. F.7(2)/DOP/A-2/81 Pt.) and 13.01.2016, it is unambiguous that qua the selection process for any public service examination the waiting/reserved list lapses after six months from issuance, and where appointments have already been made no judicial interference can be made at a belated stage.

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to refute the respondents' contentions or to substantiate the availability of seats or the survival of the lis.

Key takeaways

The petition is dismissed in light of the ratio in Om Prakash Ghiya (supra), which is treated as part and parcel of the present judgment; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (CW-210/2010; [2025:RJ-JP:10093]) by Sanjeev Kumar Tanwar against State of Raj. & Ors., assailing the 1998 advertisement/selection/recruitment process for Teacher Grade III. By the date of hearing the selection and consequential appointments stood completed, a fresh selection process had been initiated and culminated leaving no vacant posts, and an identical lis had been adjudicated in Om Prakash Ghiya (SBCWP No. 2706/2000, decided 13.02.2025). Placing reliance on State of Orissa v. Raj Kishore Nanda ((2010) 6 SCC 777), Girdhar Kumar Dadhich v. State of Rajasthan ((2009) 2 SCC 706), Union of India v. B. Valluvan ((2006) 8 SCC 686) and Raj Rishi Mehra v. State of Punjab ((2013) 12 SCC 243), and on Rajasthan Department of Personnel circulars dated 19.07.2001 (No. F.7(2)/DOP/A-2/81 Pt.) and 13.01.2016, under which the waiting/reserved list lapses six months from issuance and no judicial interference is possible at a belated stage once appointments are made, the Court dismissed the petition, adopting the Om Prakash Ghiya ratio as part and parcel of this judgment. Pending applications disposed of. Counsel for the petitioner could not substantiate availability of seats or survival of the lis. (Sameer Jain, J.; 05/03/2025.)

[2025:RJ-JP:10093]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 210/2010

Sanjeev Kumar Tanwar

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Raj And Ors

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

: Mr. Rajendra Soni : Mr. B. S. Chhaba, AAG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Judgment

05/03/2025

At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the respondents have submitted that the present petition is filed assailing an/a advertisement/selection/recruitment process initiated in the year 1998 wherein the petitioner(s) has/have applied for the post of Teacher Grade III.

Subsequently, it is apprised that ever since issuance of the said advertisement/recruitment process much water has flown and as on date the impugned selection process is already over with all its consequential appointments being granted/made. Nevertheless, a subsequent fresh advertisement/selection process was also initiated and culminated. Thence, it can be deduced that as on date, no vacant seats/posts are available.

Lastly, it is apprised that the present lis /identical lis is no more res integra and is already adjudicated vide judgment dated 13.02.2025 passed in SBCWP No. 2706/2000 titled as Om

(2 of 2)

[2025:RJ-JP:10093]

[CW-210/2010]

Prakash Ghiya Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Therefore, the said ratio can be made applicable to the present petition also.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) is unable to refute the aforementioned contentions or substantiate the availability of seats/ survival of the lis in hand.

In pursuance of the contentions noted insofar, this Court deems it apposite to place reliance upon the ratio encapsulated in State of Orissa & Anr. v. Raj Kishore Nanda & Ors. reported in (2010) 6 SCC 777, Girdhar Kumar Dadhich Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (2009) 2 SCC 706, Union of India v. B. Valluvan reported in (2006) 8 SCC 686 and Raj Rishi Mehra & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2013) 12 SCC 243 , and the circulars issued by the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Personnel dated 19.07.2001 bearing No. F.7(2)/DOP/A-2/81 Pt. and Øekad i-7 ¼2½ dkfeZd@d&2@81 ikVZ dated 13.01.2016 passed by jktLFkku ljdkj dkfeZd ¼d&2½ foHkkx, whereby it is made unambiguous that qua the selection process for any public service examination, the waiting/reserved list lapses after a span of six months from the date of its issuance, and if appointments are already made, then no judicial interference can be made at a belated stage.

Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in light of ratio passed in Om Prakash Ghiya (supra) which shall be treated as a part and parcel of the present judgment. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

(SAMEER JAIN),J

Pooja /47