Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 668 (RAJ)

Sampat Bai v. State of Rajasthan

2016-05-11

AJAY RASTOGI, G.R.MOOLCHANDANI

body2016
JUDGMENT : G.R. Moolchandani, J. The instant appeals are directed against the order of learned Single Judge impugned dated 13th August, 2015. 2. At the outset, we notice that 7 writ petitions were decided by a common judgment. The batch of writ petitions were preferred by the writ petitioners who represent a bulk of Safai Karamcharis (Sanitation Workers) of the Municipal Board, Rawatbhata whose appointments were directed to be cancelled by the Local Self Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur vide order dated 17.10.2014 and the consequential order dated 22.10.2014 passed by the Municipal Board, Rawatbhata. 3. The facts which emerge from the record are that an advertisement dated 25th May, 2012 was published by the Local Self Department holding selections for the post of Safai Karamcharis in various Municipal Boards of State of Rajasthan and in furtherance thereof, the selection process was initiated by the concerned Municipality for recruitment to fill 122 vacancies of Safai Karamcharis. 4. However, the guidelines were amended on 3.5.2013 and it was ordered to make selections in accordance with amended guidelines which has to be universally followed by all the municipal boards holding selections of Safai Karamcharis. As alleged, the Selection committee was constituted and on its recommendations, appointments were made of the Safai Karamchari. 5. It reveals that a complaint was made regarding constitution of the selection committee and procedure adopted by the committee & when this matter reached to the authorities, a committee was constituted to inquire into the matter and submit its report. The enquiry committee submitted its report and concluded that the recommendations made by the Selection Committee and appointments made in furtherance thereof are fraudulent and tainted and recommended for its cancellation. 6. The report was furnished to the Local Self Department vide letter dated 13th December, 2013. In compliance thereof, further orders were passed cancelling such appointments. The enquiry committee submitted its report and concluded that the recommendations made by the Selection Committee and appointments made in furtherance thereof are fraudulent and tainted and recommended for its cancellation. 6. The report was furnished to the Local Self Department vide letter dated 13th December, 2013. In compliance thereof, further orders were passed cancelling such appointments. The learned Single Judge, at the outset, reproduced the whole of the enquiry report and in detail, examined each stage of the procedure and observed that even the candidates who were over age were selected and the Committee was not validly constituted, as prescribed by the law and submit its report indicating reasons for which the guidelines made by the Government could not be followed and finally the Committee in its report recommended and questioned the very procedure adopted by the respondents in recommending the names of the candidates for appointment on the post of Safai Karamcharis. 7. The learned Single Judge examined the entire material and report of enquiry in extenso and finally arrived lo the conclusion that the selection process initiated by the respondent authority is fraudulent and cryptic and the candidates selected were either related to the Members of Selection Committee or were the relatives of the employees already working in the Municipal Board and few of them were either over or under age and some of them are those who are having more than two children after the cut off date and not eligible for appointment and few of them are residents of outside the State of Rajasthan and pointed out number of irregularities and shortcomings in the process adopted by the selection committee while making recommendation and finally after scrutinising the record, concurred with the view expressed by the Enquiry Committee and arrived to the conclusion that the impugned decision of the authority does not suffer from any irregularity or perversity and requires no interference being made in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. After we have heard counsel for the parties, and perused the order impugned passed by tire learned Single Judge, we do not find any error which may call for our interference. 9. 8. After we have heard counsel for the parties, and perused the order impugned passed by tire learned Single Judge, we do not find any error which may call for our interference. 9. At this juncture, counsel for the petitioners submits that authorities may be directed to hold fresh selection process and they may be given an opportunity to participate in the selection process and try their luck once again. It is expected from the authorities to initiate the fresh selection process of Safai Karamchari as early as possible. 10. Consequently, the instant batch of appeals is devoid of merit, accordingly stands dismissed.