Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rameshwar vs . State Of Rajasthan & Ors. on 11 September, 2014
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6158/2009.
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Order dated 11/09/2014
1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR.
:: O R D E R ::
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6158/2009.
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Date of Order :::: 11th September, 2014.
PRESENT
HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
Appearance:
Mr. Rameshwar, petitioner present-in-person.
Mr. Ramphool Koli, Section Officer & OIC,
R.P.S.C., Ajmer.
--
BY THE COURT:
1. The lawyers are observing strike which is contrary to various Supreme Court decisions. The case is listed in today's cause list at Serial No.41 under the category 'final disposal at admission stage'. Names of Mr. V.K. Mathur and Mr. M.S. Godara, as counsel for the petitioner, is shown in the cause list.
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6158/2009.
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Order dated 11/09/2014 2/5
2. Heard the petitioner and the Officer-in-Charge (Section Officer, RPSC, Ajmer), who are present in person and perused the record.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on 24.06.2009 seeking following relief(s): -
"It is, therefore, most humbly and
respectfully prayed that: -
A) A writ, order or direction in the
appropriate nature may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner and the action of the respondents as well as of the Interview Board may be declared illegal and the merit list published by the respondent in regard to the Lecturer in Textile Design may also be quashed and set aside and respondents may be directed to declare the petitioner eligible for the post of Lecturer and accordingly appoint him.
B) That any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.
C) That cost of the writ petition may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."
4. According to the petitioner, he was more eligible candidate to be selected on the post of Lecturer, Textile Design in the selection process conducted by the respondent- Rajasthan S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6158/2009.
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Order dated 11/09/2014 3/5 Public Service Commission (RPSC) as compared to private respondent No.3, namely, Ms. Anju Vyas, who was later on appointed on the recommendations of the respondent RPSC on the post of Lecturer in Textile Design.
5. In pursuance of the previous order granted by this Court dated 08.09.2014, the representative of respondent RPSC, Mr. Ramphool Koli, Section Officer, has produced the result of the present petitioner in the interview conducted by the respondent for the said post. On perusal of the said result sheet, which has also been shown to the petitioner in the Court, it is revealed that the petitioner has secured only 35 marks as against the minimum cut off marks of 45 in the SC category.
6. The petitioner has obviously, therefore, failed to secure the minimum cut-off marks in the interview for the said selection process and he has failed. The petitioner, therefore, submitted that since the private respondent No.3 was ineligible for applying for the said post, as she was not having the experience of two years, and therefore, she could not have been permitted to appear in the said selection process at all and thus the writ petition deserves to be allowed.
7. At the instance of the petitioner, the experience certificate issued in favour of private respondent No.3, Ms. Anju Vyas and the petitioner vide Annex.12 and Annex.8, were S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6158/2009.
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Order dated 11/09/2014 4/5 perused by the Court. Both these certificates have been issued by private agencies, namely, Jan Shikshan Sansthan, Jodhpur, in the case of private respondent No.3 and the another certificate has been issued by M/s Bherawa Textile Industries, Pali-Marwar. Both these certificates do not give the complete particulars of actual number of months or the years worked by these two parties respectively and are, therefore, they are vague and not countenanced as a valid evidence admissible in the writ jurisdiction.
8. The experience certificate issued in favour of petitioner by the private agency, namely, M/s Bherawa Textile Industries, Pali-Marwar, even if it is taken its face value, merely stipulates that the petitioner has worked as a Supervisor in their organization on salary basis and was paid @ Rs.5000/- per month during the period "31 Sep. 2003" to 10 April 2007 (Sic! '30 Sep. 2003') and his performance was found to be satisfactory. The said certificate cannot be taken as a valid certificate of more than two years. Since nothing specific about actual working for the full period is mentioned in the certificate and, therefore, the eligibility of the petitioner himself is questionable. Admittedly the petitioner has failed to secure the minimum marks in the interview of the said selection process and, therefore, no further interference is required to be made in the present matter at the S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6158/2009.
Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Order dated 11/09/2014 5/5 instance of the petitioner for upsetting the selection and appointment of the private respondent No.3, Ms. Anju Vyas at this stage. Such disputed questions of facts cannot be determined by the writ court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. In view of above discussion, the writ petition is found to be bereft of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith.
(Dr. VINEET KOTHARI), J.
DJ/-
41