Supreme Court - Daily Orders
State Of Rajasthan vs Shrankhala Parashar on 26 April, 2024
Bench: Hrishikesh Roy, Prashant Kumar Mishra
1
ITEM NO.59 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 32638/2023
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-04-2022
in DBSAW No. 1366/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For
Rajasthan At Jaipur)
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SHRANKHALA PARASHAR Respondent(s)
IA No. 179286/2023 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
IA No. 179287/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 26-04-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
Mr. Vishal Meghwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Subhasish Bhowmick, AOR
Ms. Manisha Pandey, Adv.
Ms. Neerja Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Kushwaha, Adv.
Mr. Ashutosh Singh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
2. Heard Mr. Vishal Meghwal, learned counsel appearing for the State of Rajasthan. Also heard Mr. Subhasish Bhowmick, learned Signature Not Verified counsel appearing for the respondent.
Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2024.04.30 10:43:36 IST Reason:3. The counsel for the parties has produced the order passed by this Court on 14.02.2024 in the Civil Appeal No.6559 of 2023 (The 2 State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Gomi), to say that the present case should also be remitted back to the High Court for appropriate adjudication in terms of the order passed in similar matter. The referred order is extracted hereasunder:-
“CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6559 OF 2023
1. The respondent is the writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge of the High Court. The respondent desired to apply for the post of Female Health Worker in the non-scheduled area on the basis of the advertisement dated 18.06.2018.
2. The writ petition was filed on 20.08.2018 by the first respondent before the learned Single Judge of the High Court. It is apparent from the prayers made in the petition that even the application form of the respondent was not accepted. Therefore, the following were the prayers in the writ petition, which read thus: -
“(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to treat the qualification of Adeeb, Jamia Urdu, Aligarh (Annexure1) possessed by the petitioner equivalent to the qualification of Secondary Examination from Board of Secondary Education, Ajmer and be directed to accept the application form of the petitioner and she may be allowed to participate in the selection process of Health Worker (Female) in pursuance of the advertisement dated 18.06.2018. (ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to provide appointment to the petitioner on the post of Women Health Worker in pursuant to the advertisement dated 18.06.2018 (Annexure-4) with all consequential benefits while treating the qualification of Adedb, Jamia Urdu, Aligarh equivalent to the qualification of Secondary Examination from Board of Secondary Education, Ajmer.”
3. The learned Single Judge, by the judgment and order dated 20.08.2018, dismissed the petition. We find from the order of the learned Single Judge that he has not gone into the question whether the appellants were under an obligation to accept the application form of the respondent and whether the respondent was eligible in terms of the 3 qualification mentioned in the advertisement. Only by referring earlier decision of the same Court in the case of Anand Badan, the learned Judge dismissed the petition. The impugned order has been passed in an appeal preferred by the respondent before the Division Bench. Again, there is no consideration of the merits of the case of the respondent.
Based on a decision in the case of the State of Rajasthan and Ors. Vs. Firdos Tarannum and Anr. in Civil Special Appeal No. 521 of 2005 decided on 12.01.2022, the appeal was disposed of by directing the appellants to offer an appointment to the respondent. Even against said decision dated 12.01.2022, in the case of Firdos Tarannum(supra), the State of Rajasthan filed C.A. No. 2646 of 2024 in SLP(C) No. 11496 of 2023, which is dismissed today by a separate order. We find in that case, the applicant possessed STC qualification of a recognition institution as mentioned in the advertisement. Moreover, that was a case of appointment to the post of Urdu Teacher, and that was not a case where even an application made pursuant to the advertisement was not accepted.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent tried to submit that in terms of the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge, the respondent was allowed to participate in the selection process, and the respondent’s name was included in the merit list. 5. It is well settled that the interim order merges with the final order. Neither the learned Single nor the Division Bench has held any adjudication, firstly, on the question of whether the concerned authorities wrongfully denied the opportunity the respondent to file an application form and whether the respondent was eligible in terms of the advertisement. 6. As noted earlier, on facts, the case of Firdos Tarannum(supra) was different. In the present case, there was an initial hurdle in the way of the respondent that her form was not accepted.
7. In the absence of any adjudication made both by the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench, we have no option but to remand the writ petition to the learned Single Judge. The reason is that for the first time in this appeal, we cannot make an adjudication on several factual aspects. The other reason is that if there is a proper adjudication made by the learned Single Judge, a remedy of appeal before the Division Bench will be available to the aggrieved parties.
8. We, therefore, set aside both the impugned orders dated 02.02.2022 and 20.07.2018 and restore the S.B.C.W.P. No. 10748 of 2018 before the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur.
49. We direct the Registrar (Judicial) of the said High Court to place the said writ petition before the roster Bench on 04.03.2024 at 10:30 a.m. in the morning. We also direct the parties to this appeal to remain present before the learned Single Judge on that day so that the learned Single Judge can fix a schedule for the final hearing of the writ petition.
10. Considering the issue is of the grant of employment, we request the learned Single Judge to give the necessary priority to the hearing of the writ petition.
11. The appeal is partly allowed on the above terms.
12. However, we make it clear that all issues are left open to be decided by the learned Single Judge of the High Court.
13. If there are vacant seats in the posts to which the respondent 6 intended to apply, we hope and trust that the State will not be in a hurry to fill in those seats. Even if the State makes any appointment notwithstanding the observations made above, while issuing an order of appointment, the State Government will make it very clear that the appointment will be subject to the outcome of the pending writ petitions, which are remitted back to the High Court.
14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.”
4. As the respondent is aspiring for the post of Laboratory Assistant on the basis of a similar degree which is projected to be equivalent to BA/B.ed Degree in the State of Rajasthan, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this matter in light of the afore-quoted directions in the Civil Appeal No.6559 of 2023 (The State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Gomi). The Special Leave Petition is disposed of accordingly.
5. Pending application(s), if any, stand closed.
(DEEPAK JOSHI) (KAMLESH RAWAT) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR