Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1362 (RAJ)

Mamta Rani v. State of Rajasthan

2017-05-26

NIRMALJIT KAUR

body2017
JUDGMENT : NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. 1. The prayer in the present writ petition is for issuance of direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner under the widow category (BC, WD) in her subject for the purpose of selection in Rajasthan State & Subordinate Combined Competitive Examination, 2013. 2. Reliance is placed on the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & ors. v. Ms. Jamna Rajpurohit (D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 82/2013) and other connected appeals decided on 30.08.2013. 3. The petitioner had applied in pursuance to the advertisement issued for Rajasthan State & Subordinate Combined Competitive Examination, 2013. The petitioner appeared in the preliminary examination held on 31.10.2015 as per the schedule issued by the respondents. The petitioner was successful in the preliminary examination and accordingly, appeared in the main examination, which was held between 09.04.2016 to 12.04.2016. The petitioner cleared the main examination and was also called for the interview, which was held between 10.08.2016 to 06.12.2016. The result of the interview was declared on 06.12.2016 and the Combined Merit List was recommended to the department on 23.02.2017. Thus, the selection was over and only appointment orders had to be issued as per the preference and merit of the candidates. The husband of the petitioner died on 14.04.2017. The death certificate was issued to the petitioner on 25.04.2017 and only thereafter, the petitioner filed her representation on 26.04.2017 to consider her under the Widow category. 4. There is no doubt with the proposition of law laid down in the judgment rendered in the case of Jamna Rajpurohit (supra). However, the same does not help the petitioner in the facts of the present case. In the said case, the petitioner had applied much before the declaration of the result and it is evident from the facts of the said case that the respondents had decided to fill up the vacancies reserved for the widow category from the General category as probably no candidate under the said category was available. In the present case, the petitioner had applied much after the declaration of the result. Moreover, it is stated by the learned counsel for the respondents that sufficient number of candidates had applied under the widow category and are also figuring in the merit. In the present case, the petitioner had applied much after the declaration of the result. Moreover, it is stated by the learned counsel for the respondents that sufficient number of candidates had applied under the widow category and are also figuring in the merit. Even, from the list placed on record as Annexure-7, which is admittedly not the complete list of the selected candidates, it is evident that almost 08 candidates belonged to the widow category, who are suffering the widowhood since long vis-a-vis the present petitioner are available. These candidates are not even a party before this Court. In spite of the same, this Court may have granted the concession of considering the petitioner against the said category in case, the similarly situated candidates were not available. The same being available, no such direction can be issued at this belated stage.