Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Babu Lal Choudhary vs State Of Raj And Anr on 11 December, 2017
Author: Ashok Kumar Gaur
Bench: Ashok Kumar Gaur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22669 / 2017
Babu Lal Choudhary S/o Boduram Choudhary, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Village Nayabas Post Mahala Via Bagru Tehsil Dudu
Distt. Jaipur
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department of Home, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Inspector General of Police, Head Office, Jaipur
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raghunandan Sharma Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Dr. A.S. Khangarot Add. Govt. Counsel
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Order
11/12/2017
The present petitioner has sought a mandamus against the
respondents-State to accept the application form online or hard
copy of the petitioners with regard to the post of Constable
(General) and (Driver) for advertisement of the year 2017 by
giving the age relaxation of upper age limit in view of the
notification dated 23.9.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioners
has further prayed that the petitioner may be permitted to the appear in the written examination and in case, he succeed, he may be given appointment with all the consequential benefits.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have further placed reliance on an order dated 10.11.2017 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13917/2017, (Kishore Singh Gehlot Vs. State of (2 of 4) [CW-22669/2017] Rjasthan & Ors.). The Co-ordinate Bench at Principal Seat, Jodhpur, while considering the similar grievance of the candidates like petitioner, has disposed of the writ petition.
Dr. A.S. Khangarot, AGC, counsel for the respondent also submits that the Principal Seat at Jodhpur has passed the order directing the candidates to submit their representation for grant of relaxation in upper age, however, he submits that the direction so given may not be taken as a direction to decide the petitioner's representation for grant of relaxation in upper age limit in a particular manner.
The Principal Seat at Jodhpur, while passing the order dated 10.11.2017 has taken into account the judgment of the Division Bench dated 25.3.2014 passed in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1151/2013, Rajasthan Public Service Commission Vs. Mahendra Kumar & Ors., wherein the Division Bench has declined to grant benefit of age relaxation and has further set aside the order of Single Bench dated 26.8.2013 granting benefit of the age relaxation.
The Co-ordinate Bench at Jodhpur, considered the judgment dated 3.5.2017 and disposed of the writ petition in the following manner:-
"Looking to the innocuous order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur, vide its judgment dated 03.05.2017, this Court feels inclined to issue identical directions in the present petition, as under:-
Therefore, in the interest of justice, each petitioner is granted liberty to make representation to the State Government on the anvil of Rule 46 of Rules of 1989 and other co- related rules applicable to the case of relaxation with regard to the age. It is ordered that in case (3 of 4) [CW-22669/2017] the representation is filed by the petitioner in individual capacity within two weeks from today, then the State Government shall take decision upon the representation so filed within a period of four weeks, independently without persuaded by any observation made by this Court. It is further ordered that till the representation to be made by the petitioners is considered by the State Government, the respondent shall accept the application form of the petitioners offline and proceed with the process of recruitment considering the application of each petitioner to be in order.
It is further ordered that till the representation to be made by the petitioners is considered by the State Government, the respondent shall accept the application form of the petitioners offline and proceed with the process of recruitment considering the application of each petitioner to be in order.
It is further clarified that in case the State Government reject the representations of the petitioner or petitioners, candidature of the petitioner/petitioners shall be canceled and they shall be at liberty to assail the decision of the State Government. However, in case the State accepts representation and grant relaxation, the respondents shall proceed ahead with the matter. It is further clarified that the Court has only ordered that till the decision of the representation, application of the petitioners shall be accepted offline without commenting upon the rights of the State Government to grant or refuse relaxation qua the age of a candidate."
The present writ petition is also decided in the same terms as the decided by order dated 10.11.2017 at Principal Seat, Jodhpur.
The respondents are directed to decide petitioner's representation or take a common decision applicable to all for grant of relaxation in upper age limit, on or before 15.12.2017.
The respondents are directed to accept offline forms (manually) of the petitioner which he is required to give before (4 of 4) [CW-22669/2017] last date i.e. 25.12.2017.
The direction to decide the petitioner's representation for grant of relaxation in the upper age limit has been issued with a view to ensure speedy redressal of their grievance and same may not be taken to be a direction to decide the petitioner's representation for grant of relaxation in upper age limit in a particular manner.
Accordingly the present writ petition is disposed of.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR)J. Monika/116