Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1691 (RAJ)

JYOTI JINGER v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2019-05-29

ALOK SHARMA

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner has prayed for direction to be appointed to the post of Lecturer Computer Engineering (LCE) with the Directorate of Technical Education as per her merit in the Scheduled Caste (Women) (SC WE) category. 2. The background facts for the relief prayed for are that the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC)s advertisement dated 22-7-2014 inter alia called for applications for recruitment for 46 posts of Lecturer Computer Engineering (LCE) under the Rajasthan Technical Engineering Service Rules, 2010 (hereafter `the Rules of 2010). Of the said 46 posts, 2 posts were reserved for General Women Widow (GE WE Widow) category, 1 post for Schedule Caste (SC) Women (WE) and three posts for Other Backward Class (OBC) Women (WE) category. No post was reserved for OBC WE Divorce (DV). 3. Admitted to written examination as a SC WE candidate the petitioner being successful, as per result declared on 8-6-2016, was called for interview. Following the interview her aggregate marks being 62, she found place at Sr. No. 42 in RPSCs merit list/ select list issued on 1-8-2017 for the post of LCE. As per her merit position, the petitioner was entitled to be appointed as LCE on the post reserved in the quota for SC WE. 4. Subsequent to declaration of select list dated 1-8-2017 as aforesaid, reservation to Special Backward Castes (SBC) to an extent of 5%, over the then existing 49% reservation for SC/ ST/ OBC, entailing overall reservation of 54%, having put to challenge in the case of Cap. Gurvinder Singh v. State of Rajasthan, DB Civil Writ Petition No. 1645/2016, was set aside vide judgment dated 9-7-2016. This resulted in category wise reclassification of the 46 vacancies on the post of LCE where the posts available for general category were increased. There was no variation of posts reserved for Scheduled Caste or OBC women. This reclassification, following requisite steps for selection to the additional post in the General category GE, entailed the select list, for the 46 advertised posts of LCE, being revised on 9-4-2018. Therein the petitioner, earlier in the main select list dated 1-8-2017 at Serial No. 42, was excluded from the main select list and relegated to Sr.No.14 in the reserve list in the category of SC women. 5. On enquiries by the petitioner it transpired that one Dr. Therein the petitioner, earlier in the main select list dated 1-8-2017 at Serial No. 42, was excluded from the main select list and relegated to Sr.No.14 in the reserve list in the category of SC women. 5. On enquiries by the petitioner it transpired that one Dr. Purnima Jaiswal had filed SBCWP No. 12738/2017 asserting her entitlement to one of the 46 posts of LCE in the Other Backward Class (OBC) Women (WE) Divorcee (DV) (OBC WE DV) category and claiming that she was wrongly denied consideration. This court vide exparte interim order dated 11-8-2017 directed that one post of LCE in the OBC WE DV category be kept vacant for her. In the purported compliance of the said exparte interim order dated 11-8- 2017, RPSC was advised to keep vacant one post in the General Women (GE WE) category, as no post in the OBC WE DV category obtained. This keeping one post in the GE WE category vacant entailed one Sandhya Lohiya SC WE DV category candidate with 64 marks migrated to the GE WE category on her merit, being pushed down and instead included in the SC WE category in the revised result of 9-4-2018. Consequent to aforesaid pushing down of Sandhya Lohia, the petitioner, with 62 marks otherwise in the select list dated 1-8-2017 for appointment in SC WE category, being similarly pushed down and out of the select list for appointment to the post of LCE in the SC WE category and being placed only in the reserve list at Sr. No. 14. 6. The narration of aforesaid facts indicates that the petitioner has been pushed down, and out of the select list dated 1-8-2017 by the revised select list dated 9-4-2018 and excluded from her entitlement to appointment as LCE in SC WE category on account of Sandhya Lohiya, also belonging to SC WE category but in the GE WE category on migration to the said category on her merit not being so appointed as such, for the reason that one post in GE WE category was kept vacant pursuant to interim order dated 11-8-2017 in SBCWP No. 12738/2017 filed by Dr. Purnima Jaiswal (supra). 7. In the course of hearing of the petition it has transpired that the exparte interim order dated 11-8-2017 in SBCWP No. 12738/2017, of Dr. Purnima Jaiswal (supra). 7. In the course of hearing of the petition it has transpired that the exparte interim order dated 11-8-2017 in SBCWP No. 12738/2017, of Dr. Purnima Jaiswal (supra) has been set aside on 2-4-2019 inter alia for the reason that she only secured 50 marks in the aggregate at the selection process for the post of LCE following RPSCs advertisement dated 22-7-2014, while the cut off marks for the appointment in the OBC WE was 66 and no post was in any event reserved for OBC WE DV. 8. The consequence of the aforesaid fact is that the one seat of LCE in the quota of GE WE became available for Sandhya Lohiyaa SC WE DV to be appointed on migration on the basis of her merit as no GE WE category candidate admittedly has a higher aggregate mark at the selection for the post of LCE than the said Sandhya Lohiya with 62 marks. 9. Resultantly on the migration of Sandhya Lohiya, a SC WE category to GE WE category for appointment as LCE, the consequent vacant seat in the SC WE category entails the petitioner a SC WE to be considered to be appointed on the said vacant post of LCE. 10. In this view of the matter, I would allow this petition with a direction that the petitioner be considered in terms of her merit in the select list dated 1-8-2017 on the vacant seat in the quota of SC WE as obtaining following the migration of Sandhya Lohiyaa SC WE to the category of GE WE, in view of her being a more meritorious candidate than any GE WE candidates at the examination/ selection in issue. 11. The aforesaid direction be complied with within four weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order this in view of the fact that the petitioner has been awaiting for her appointment on the post of LCE as per her merit for the last twenty months. 12. The petition stands allowed accordingly.