Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Pradeep Kumar Son Of Shri Nihal Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 30 January, 2024
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2024:RJ-JP:4887]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 658/2024
Pradeep Kumar Son Of Shri Nihal Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
Resident Of Vpo Siras, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Finance,
Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director, Department Of Treasuries And Accounts,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jyothi Nagar, Lal Kothi, Jaipur
(Rajasthan).
3. Secretary, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Rajya
Krishi Pradhan Sansthan Parisar, Durgapura, Jaipur-
302018 (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akhil Dadhich for
Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
30/01/2024
1. The instant petition is filed with the following prayers:-
i) by an appropriate writ, order, or direction, the petitioner may kindly be allowed to participate in the second phase of the examination of Junior Accountant and Tehsil Revenue Accountant conducted in pursuance of the advertisement dated 20/06/2023 (Annex.1). Consequently, the appointment may also be given to the petitioner on the post of Junior Accountant.
ii) Any other appropriate order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may consider just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be passed in favour of the humble petitioner.
iii) Cost of this writ petition may also kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner."
(Downloaded on 09/02/2024 at 10:34:11 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:4887] (2 of 4) [CW-658/2024]
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent no.3-Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur notified an advertisement No. 02/2023 dated 20.06.2023 for conducting Common Eligibility Test (Graduation Level)- 2022 for the purpose of recruitment on the post of Junior Accountant and Tehsil Revenue Accountant. For recruitment on the said post, a horizontal reservation of 12.5% was provided for ministerial employees. The petitioner, being eligible for the post of Junior Accountant, submitted an online application form. However, due to the negligence of the e-mitra operator, 'no' word was inserted in the employee category, even though the petitioner is rendering his service on the post of Junior Assistant in the Rajasthan Police Department in Bharatpur.
3. It is averred that subsequently, roll number was allotted to the petitioner. Resultantly, the petitioner participated in the written examination, which was held on 08.01.2023. The petitioner secured 82.6101 marks after normalisation. The cut-off marks were published on 06.12.2023 and according to that, the cut-off marks for ministerial employees was 31.8792. As a result, the petitioner could not be selected for the second-phase examination because he secured fewer marks than the cut-off marks in the category of OBC.
4. In this background, it is averred that the petitioner belongs to the category of 'Ministerial Employees', and he secured higher marks than the cut-off in the said category, but due to a mistake on part of the e-mitra operator, the word 'no' was added to the 'Ministerial Employees' reservation category while submitting the application form. Therefore, it was conclusively prayed that due to (Downloaded on 09/02/2024 at 10:34:11 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:4887] (3 of 4) [CW-658/2024] the negligence of the e-mitra operator, the petitioner should not be made to suffer.
5. Heard and considered.
6. Upon a considered perusal of the record of the instant petition, this Court deems it appropriate to place reliance upon Paragraph 19 of the Advertisement dated 20.06.2023. The relevant extract is reproduced herein-under:-
ß;fn fdlh vH;FkhZ ds vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa =qfV jg tkrh gS rFkk og fdlh dkj.ko"k vkosnu djus dh vafre fnukad ds i"pkr~ 07 fnol ds Hkhrj vius vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa la"kks/ku ugha dj ikrk gS rks mls vius vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa la"kks/ku djus dk ,d vkSj vafre volj ijh{kk vk;kstu ds i"pkr~ vkWuykbZu =qfV la"kks/ku gsrq ,d fuf"pr le; fn;k tk;sxk ftlesa vH;FkhZ vius vkWuykbZu vkosnu dh =qfV dks vkWuykbZu la"kks/ku dj ldsxkA vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa la"kks/ku gssrq fnukad ,oa le; dh lwpuk i`Fkd ls cksMZ dh osclkbZV ds ek/;e ls nh tk;sxhA mDr fu/kkZfjr le; esa vH;FkhZ vius vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa fu/kkZfjr la"kks/ku "kqYd 300@& :i;s vkWuykbZu vkosnu djus dh izfØ;k ds leku Hkqxrku dj la"kks/ku dj ldsxkAÞ ßblds i"pkr~ vkWuykbZu vkosnu esa fdlh izdkj dk la" kks/ku@ifjorZu ugha fd;k tk;sxk rFkk ,slh fdlh Hkh =qfV dk lEiw.kZ nkf;Ro vH;FkhZ dk gksxkAÞ
7. In the factual matrix of the instant petition, it is an admitted factual position of the petitioner that a mistake attributable to the e-mitra operator accrued, on account of which, the reservation category of 'Ministerial Employees' could not be selected.
8. In this background, it is noted that as per the advertisement dated 20.06.2023, more particularly Paragraph 19, as quoted above, a detailed mechanism is provided for the applicants to rectify the mistakes accrued during the filling of the online application form, subject to the payment of penalty to the tune of Rs. 300/-, within a period of 7 days from the closure of the online application form.
(Downloaded on 09/02/2024 at 10:34:11 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:4887] (4 of 4) [CW-658/2024]
9. Admittedly, the petitioner did not raise any such grievance by the mode prescribed by the advertisement dated 20.06.2023, despite the existence/formulation of a clear procedure for such rectification being incorporated within the body of the advertisement. Therefore, lethargy, negligence and callousness on part of the petitioner in rectifying the mistake, within the prescribed time frame of 7 days, cannot be condoned, especially in light of the fact that due procedure to carry out the rectification was in public knowledge as part of the advertisement. Rules of the game cannot be changed once the selection process is already over. Moreover, any interference at this belated stage, shall affect the rights of third parties, which have already been crystallized.
10. Accordingly, in light of the observations made herein-above, this Court deems it appropriate to dismiss the instant petition.
11. As a result, the instant petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J ANIL SHARMA /19 (Downloaded on 09/02/2024 at 10:34:11 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)