Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dipendra Singh Kumpawat vs State Of Rajasthan on 30 January, 2019
Bench: Pradeep Nandrajog, Manoj Kumar Garg
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
(1). D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1907/2018
Ravi Kumar Khateek S/o Amba Lal Khateek, Aged About 23
Years, Resident Of - Maliyo Ka Mohalla, Patwari Ke Pass,
Kothariya, Nathdwara, District - Rajsamand.
----Appellant
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Home
Department, Jaipur.
2. Director General Of Police, Jaipur.
3. Superintendent Of Police, Udaipur.
----Respondents
Connected With
(2). D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 52/2019
Dipendra Singh Kumpawat S/o Shri Hari Singh Kumpawat, Aged
About 20 Years, By Caste Rajput, R/o Quarter No. 72, Reserve
Police Line, Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
----Appellant
The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
(3). D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 53/2019
Lokesh Verma Bhand S/o Shri Manohar Lal Bhand, Aged About
27 Years, By Caste SC, R/o Near Railway Station, Kunwariya,
Koaria, Rajsamand, Rajasthan.
----Appellant
The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
----Respondents
(4). D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 8/2019
Ashoka D/o Shri Ram Lal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Shiv
Mandir, Nedi Nari, Tehsil Dhorimanna, District Barmer.
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Home
Department, Jaipur.
(2 of 7) [SAW-1907/2018]
2. Director General Of Police, Jaipur.
3. Inspector General Of Police, Kota.
4. Superintendent Of Police, Kota.
5. Police Commissioner, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Shreyansh Mardia
Mr.Hemant Dutt
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Manish Vyas, A.A.G.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order 30/01/2019
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Issue in the first three appeals concerns subjecting candidates seeking appointment to the post of Conductor undergoing Physical Efficiency Test at Udaipur on 08.09.2018. In the fourth appeal it relates to Physical Efficiency Test conducted on 11.09.2018 at Kota. It is not in dispute that in the morning of 08.09.2018 there was a heavy rainfall in Udaipur. On 11.09.2018 there was heavy rainfall in Kota. Requirement of the Physical Efficiency Test was for the candidates to run 5 kms in 25 minutes. The case of the appellants was that due to heavy rain the track became swampy and on that account it became slippery. This impacted their performance at the Physical Efficiency Test.
3. For recruiting Constable in the State of Rajasthan Physical Efficiency Tests were conducted at Jaipur, Ajmer, Kota and Udaipur on different dates being 29.08.2018, 07.09.2018, 08.09.2018, 09.09.2018, 10.09.2018, 11.09.2018 and 13.09.2018.
(3 of 7) [SAW-1907/2018]
4. Unfortunately, due to inclement weather on all these dates there was rainfall in the city of Jaipur, Ajmer, Kota and Udaipur.
5. Large number of writ petitions came to be filed. To obtain factual report a Court Commissioner was appointed to view the video footage of the tracks and submit a report. The report submitted by the Commissioner has been summarized by the learned Single Judge on pages 15 to 17 of the decision dated 27.11.2018 passed in a large number of writ petitions, lead matter being S.B.Civil Writ No.13731/2018, Revant Ram Meghwal & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. The summarized tabulation reads as under:-
Petition No. Date, Venue & Time Observations of Commissioner SBCWP 29.08.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.13731/2018 Jaipur track is visible in the video. The 4:02 P.M. videography reveals existence of water on the track. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but by looking at the feet of the candidates, it can be said that the track got reasonably sticky.
SBCWP 29.08.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.14823/2018 Jaipur track is visible in the video. The 08:46 A.M. videography does not reveal existence of significant water on the track. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks reasonably dry & firm.
SBCWP 07.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.14684/2018 Ajmer track is visible in the video. The SBCWP 10:49 A.M. videography reveals slightly wet No.16509/2018 matting (laid for the purposes of monitoring the time of candidates) which dries as the run progresses. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks dry & firm.
SBCWP 07.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the
No.14390/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The
SBCWP 9:21/22 A.M. videography reveals slight patches
(4 of 7) [SAW-1907/2018]
No.15390/2018 of wetness on matting (laid for the
SBCWP purposes of monitoring the time of
No.14376/2018 candidates) at the beginning of the
SBCWP run, which dries as the run
No.14932/2018 progresses. Though it is difficult to
extrapolate the condition of the
entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks dry & firm.
SBCWP 08.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.13987/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The 12:48 P.M. videography reveals submerged track leading to troughs / ditches on the track. There were heavy rains on this day and part of the run was even conducted during the downpour. The track ex facie looks swampy, muddy & potholed.
SBCWP 09.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.14750/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The SBCWP 02:16 P.M. videography reveals muddy track.
No.14991/2018 Though it is difficult to extrapolate SBCWP the condition of the entire track but No.14531/2018 a look at the feet of the candidates SBCWP suggest that the entire track could No.16393/2018 be pretty muddy. SBCWP 10.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.13989/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The SBCWP 09:02/03 A.M. videography reveals that the race No.15403/2018 began on a track which was dry- SBCWP muddy but over the course of the No.17071/2018 run, due to precipitation, the track
got wet-muddy. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks slightly muddy.
SBCWP 10.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.15076/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The 10:31 A.M. videography reveals that the run took place on slightly muddy albeit firm track. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but a look at the feet of the candidates would reveal that the entire track would have been somewhat muddy.
SBCWP 11.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.14449/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The 10:32 A.M. videography does not reveal existence of significant water on the track. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks reasonably firm & settled.
(5 of 7) [SAW-1907/2018]
SBCWP 13.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the
No.14419/2018 Kota track is visible in the video. The
12:35 P.M. videography does not reveal
existence of significant water on the track. As a matter of fact, this is the only run, which was conducted in partly sunny weather. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks reasonably firm & dry.
SBCWP 07.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.14362/2018 Udaipur track is visible in the video. The 11:19 A.M. videography does not reveal existence of significant water on the track. Though it is difficult to extrapolate the condition of the entire track but on the face of it, the condition of track looks reasonably firm.
SBCWP 08.09.2018 Only the start/finish section of the No.14701/2018 Udaipur track is visible in the video. Since, it SBCWP 12:42 P.M. rained before the run was held, the No.15281/2018 wetness is apparent on the visible SBCWP track. Though it is difficult to No.16016/2018 extrapolate the condition of the SBCWP entire track but a look at the feet of No.16274/2018 the running candidates would show SBCWP that the condition of track would not No.16787/2018 have been wet-muddy. SBCWP No.17156/2018
6. Observing in the judgment that it is duty of the recruiting agency to provide a reasonably normal conditions so as to ensure that the candidate is able to participate in the recruitment exercise to best of his ability and is not hampered on account of extraneous conditions, the learned Single Judge has held that where the entire track was not found to be wet or muddy, relief cannot be granted but where the track has been found to be reasonably sticky/swampy, muddy & potholed/ pretty muddy/ slightly muddy/ somewhat muddy, the candidates deserve one more opportunity to undergo the Physical Efficiency Test.
(6 of 7) [SAW-1907/2018]
7. The result is that some writ petitions were allowed with a direction that one more opportunity was granted to the candidates and the rest were dismissed.
8. A look at the data detailed by the learned Single Judge gives a vital information which appears to have been overlooked by the learned Single Judge. At Jaipur, on 29.08.2018 the Physical Efficiency Test was conducted in the morning and in the evening.
The condition of the track as of 08:46 A.M. is the same of 04:02 P.M. and this shows the level to which the track had got affected. At Kota, Physical Efficiency Test was conducted at 09:00 A.M., 12:00 Noon and 02:00 P.M. on 07.09.2018, 08.09.2018 and 09.09.2018. The data shows that on all three dates the track was affected due to rainfall. The date of the Physical Efficiency Test held on 10.09.2018 at 09:00 A.M. and 10:00 A.M. shows same position. Physical Efficiency Test conducted in Kota on 11.09.2018 and 13.09.2018 also shows the same position. At Udaipur, Physical Efficiency Test conducted on 07.09.2018 and 08.09.2018 at 11:00 A.M. and 12:00 P.M. likewise shows the track to be affected due to rainfall.
9. Under the circumstances the nuanced distinction drawn by the learned Single Judge as noted above is too tenuous. There is enough material to show that on all the dates the tracks were badly affected due to rainfall and merely because at a given time extent of damage to the track was more vis-a-vis other occasions would be no ground to drawn the distinction as has not been drawn by the learned Single Judge.
10. We allow the appeals and set-aside the impugned order dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellants.
(7 of 7) [SAW-1907/2018]
11. We direct that the appellants be subjected to fresh Physical Efficiency Test at a track which is free from water logging. (MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ 33, 34, 36 & 37- Kshama Dixit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)