Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ekta Saini D/O Suresh Kumar Saini vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 March, 2025
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2025:RJ-JP:14099]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 197/2025
Hitesh Prakash Sharma S/o Shri Ramniwas Sharma, Aged About
27 Years, Resident Of 15, Brahmano Ka Mohalla, Vayabasar,
District Kuchaman-Didwana (Nagaur)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel,
Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Vitt Bhawan,
Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Gokhale Lane,
Opp. Collectorate Office Basant Vihar, Todarmal Marg,
Civil Lines, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur Through Its
Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute
Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents
Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 183/2025 Upkar Meena S/o Shri Kamlesh Kumar Meena, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Village Sewla, Post Gadauli, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur-321602 (Raj.)
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Jaipur
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Ajmer
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (2 of 14) [CW-197/2025] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 203/2025 Kuldeep Singh S/o Shri Narendra Singh, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of 79, Rajput Was, Padar, Tehsil Revdar, District Sirohi.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Vitt Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Gokhale Lane, Opp. Collectorate Office Basant Vihar, Todarmal Marg, Civil Lines, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 259/2025 Seema Rajpurohit D/o Shri Brij Laxman Rajpurohit, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Village Kotdi, Rupangarh, District Ajmer (Raj.)
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat,jaipur
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Jaipur
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Ajmer
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 592/2025
1. Hinshuma Gurjar D/o Shri Kishan Gurjar, Aged About 27 (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (3 of 14) [CW-197/2025] Years, Resident Of H.no. 10, Goku Colony, Kundan Nagar, Ajmer (Raj.)
2. Ram Swaroop S/o Shri Radhe Shyam, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Petrol Pump Ke Pass, Biliya Road, Ranasar, Post Rasal, District Didwana Kuchaman
3. Yogesh Kumar S/o Shri Subhash Chander, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Kesri Singhpur, District Sriganganagar
4. Ankit Kumar S/o Shri Ramesh Kumar, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Vpo Karnisar Sahjipura, Hanumangarh
5. Vandana Lakhan D/o Shri Subhash Chandra, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of C/o Jawahar Basti, Ward No. 33, P.o. Sujangarh, District Churu
6. Bhagirath Ram S/o Shri Babu Ram, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Mukam Post Luniasar, Tehsil Sanchor, District Sanchor
7. Jyoti Kumari Meena D/o Shri Goklesh Meena, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Vpo Bamanwas Patti Kalan, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan
8. Sheetal Shekhawat D/o Shri Gajendra Singh Sekhawat, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Chota Pana Ki Kotri, Palsana District Sikar, Rajasthan
----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Jaipur
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Ajmer.
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1146/2025 Akhil Kumar S/o Shri Prithvi Raj, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 06, Police Chowki Ke Pass, Talwada Jheel, Tehsil (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (4 of 14) [CW-197/2025] Tibbi, District Hanumangarh - 335525 (Raj.)
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Vitt Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur-Rajasthan.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Gokhale Lane, Opp. Collectorate Office Basant Vihar, Todarmal Marg, Civil Lines, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001.
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1149/2025 Neha D/o Shri Jagdish Singh W/o Shri Dinesh Kumar, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Nayagaon Kalan, Post Samraya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj).
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Jaipur.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Ajmer.
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1167/2025 Ankit Gamar S/o Shri Sevan Kumar Gamar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Vachalikatar, Post Amaliya, Tehsil Jhadol, District Udaipur- 313701 (Raj.) (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (5 of 14) [CW-197/2025]
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Vitt Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur- Rajasthan.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Gokhale Lane, Opp. Collectorate Office Basant Vihar, Todarmal Marg, Civil Lines, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur -302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1227/2025 Tanuja Meena D/o Vijay Kumar Meena, Aged About 24 Years, R/o B-11, Tirupati Nagar, Near Cbi Phatak, Jagatpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1540/2025 Praveen Sharma Son Of Shri Bajrang Lal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 13, Near Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
----Petitioner Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (6 of 14) [CW-197/2025] Finance Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Institute Of Agriculture Management Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Rajasthan, Vitt Bhawan, A-Block, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1981/2025 Ekta Saini D/o Suresh Kumar Saini, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Plot No. 72, Jamunapuri Colony, Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2006/2025 Dilip Kumar S/o Gokul Chand Nayak, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Vpo Nayako Ka Mohalla, Chhpoli, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (7 of 14) [CW-197/2025] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 490/2025
1. Yogesh Kumar S/o Shri Kedar Singh Jatav, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Village Bhatt Ka Pura, Pos Vijaypura, Tehsil Sauroth, Karauli
2. Asha Mundotiya D/o Shri Sanwarmal Mundotiya, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 7, Khatu Shyamji Dantaramgarh, Sikar.
----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Jaipur.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Ajmer.
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1136/2025 J.k. Puri S/o Shri Virendra, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Village Math Hatti, Post Basedi, Tehsil Basedi, District Dholpur (Raj).
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Vitt Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur-Rajasthan.
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Gokhale Lane, Opp. Collectorate Office Basant Vihar, Todarmal Marg, Civil Lines, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur Through Its (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (8 of 14) [CW-197/2025] Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1986/2025 Surendra Bhanwaria S/o Dharma Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Bhanwaria Ki Dhani, Navalpura, Village And Post Borunda, Tehsil Piparcity, District Jodhpur.
----Petitioner Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur
2. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 254/2025 Priyanka Kumari D/o Shri Manphool Ram, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Shanti Sadan, Bhimnagar, Dada Pota Park Ke Pass, Mukta Prasad Nagar, Bikaner (Raj.) Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat,jaipur
3. The Director, Treasury And Accounts, Jaipur
4. The Revenue Board, Through Its Registrar, Ajmer
5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Through Its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanveer Ahamad, Adv.
Mr. Ram Pratap Saini, Adv.
(Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM)[2025:RJ-JP:14099] (9 of 14) [CW-197/2025] Mr. Satya Narain Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sita Ram Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Taneja, AAG Mr. Sandeep Kumar Maheshwari with Mr. Ms.Bhavna Laddha, Adv.
Ms. Manju Joshi, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 27/03/2025
1. Considering the identical factual narratives and legal issues involved, with the consent of respective sides, the instant bunch of petitions is adjudicated vide common judgment which shall be made applicable on mutatis mutandis basis. With consent of counsel representing various parties, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.197/2025 titled as Hitesh Prakash Sharma Vs. State of Raj. & Ors., is taken as a lead petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that an advertisement dated 20.06.2023 was issued by the respondents under the provisions of Rajasthan Subordinate Account Service Rules, 1963 read with Rajasthan Revenue Accounts Subordinate Service Rules 1975, inviting applications for the post of Junior Accountant and Tehsil Revenue Accountant. It is further submitted that Clause 6 of the advertisement specifies eligibility and educational qualification for the said post. Further, it is submitted that rejection of the petitioners' candidature for not possessing requisite qualification is unjust and arbitrary. In support of the said contention, it is submitted that the petitioners have acquired computer education while pursuing their Senior Secondary/ Graduation/ B.Ed and allied courses, thus, fulfilling the above (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (10 of 14) [CW-197/2025] mentioned requirement qua eligibility and educational qualification. Further, it is submitted that computer course was one of the ancillary subject in their curriculum, therefore, the petitioners herein possess the computer knowledge as required.
3. Additionally, it is submitted that as per the terms of the advertisement and as per the provisions of Rajasthan Subordinate Accounts Service Rules, 1963 and Rajasthan Revenue Accounts Subordinate Service Rules 1975, the requirement was to possess the 'working knowledge on computer concepts' i.e. to possess the basic skills and understanding which is necessary to operate, utilize and manage the computers effectively including tasks like using software, managing files and others, and the same is duly possessed by the petitioners. Subsequently, it is submitted that the petitioners have pursued the RS-CIT course, however, qua the said course, certificate was issued after the cut of date/document verification, in this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the same should not cause impediment qua the petitioners and they should be considered qualified for the said post.
4. Further, while placing reliance upon the judgment passed in Rehana Kousher vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SBCWP No. 5764/2019); Lokesh Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SBCWP No. 27795/2018) and Lalita vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SBCWP No. 11981/2018), it is submitted that knowledge acquired qua computer while pursuing Senior Secondary/ Graduation/B.Ed and allied courses should be considered as a requisite qualification for the said post moresoever, when the petitioners have secured merit, therefore, (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (11 of 14) [CW-197/2025] in light of the above cited, appointment letters should be issued to them and they should be permitted to join accordingly.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently objected the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and submitted that the present petitions are not maintainable for the reason that the petitioners have assailed the requirement qua eligibility criteria and educational qualification at a belated stage, i.e. after duly participating in the examination, therefore the said argument can not be considered following the principle of acquiescence. It is further submitted that under the judicial review, Court cannot consider the eligibility criteria, moreso, when the said eligibility criteria is explicitly stated under the Rules of 1963 and terms and conditions of the advertisement.
6. Additionally, reliance is placed upon the dictum enunciated in the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maharashtra Public Service Commission vs Sandeep Shriram Warade & Ors. reported in (2019) 6 SCC 362.
7. Furthermore, it is submitted that Clause 6 of the advertisement and Rule 11 of the Rules of 1963, enumerates the qualification and eligibility, therefore, if the qualification is explicitly stated therein, then no interference can be made by the authority or department disregarding the provisions of the Rules and terms and conditions of the advertisement. Further, it is submitted that despite the fact that petitioners have secured merit, the qualification and degree specified in the Rules and advertisement cannot be equated with the degree/qualification possessed by the petitioners. Moreover, the computer course pursued by the petitioners is not the specified computer course (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (12 of 14) [CW-197/2025] but is an ancillary course. In support of the contentions made insofar, reliance is placed upon the judgment passed in Ram Kishan Meena vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., (SBCWP No. 4676/2010) and Shivdutt Singh Rathore vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (SBCWP No. 11309/2017).
8. Lastly, it is submitted that RS-CIT qualification/certificate cannot be considered qua the eligibility criteria for the reason that the same is acquired after the stipulated cut-off date/ document verification. In support of the same, reliance is placed upon the dictum encapsulated in Shivdutt Singh Rathore (supra).
9. Heard and considered.
10. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, upon perusal of the records, taking note of the judgments at the Bar, this Court has made the following observations:-
10.1 That advertisement was issued under the provisions of Rajasthan Subordinate Accounts Service Rules, 1963 and Rajasthan Revenue Accounts Subordinate Service Rules 1975, wherein, applications were invited for the post of Junior Accountant and Tehsil Revenue Accountant Services. 10.2 That eligibility criteria and qualification for the said post are specified under the provisions of Rule 11 and Clause 6 of the advertisement. The relevant portion of the Rule 11 (Schedule-I) is specified herein below:-
Junior 100% by Must hold a degree of any of the Accountant direct Universities incorporated by an Act of the recruitment Central or State Legislature in India or through other educational institution established by competitive an Act of Parliament or declared, to be examination. deemed as a University under Sec. 3 of the (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (13 of 14) [CW-197/2025] University Grants Commission Act, 1956, or possess an equivalent qualification recognized by the Government in consultation with the Commission;
OR Must have passed Intermediate examination of the Institute of Cost & Works Accountants, Kolkata;
OR Intermediate examination of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, New Delhi.
AND "O" or Higher-Level Certificate Course conducted by DOEACC (NIELIT) under control of the Department of Electronics, Government of India;
OR Computer Operator & Programming Assistant (COPA)/Data Preparation and Computer Software (DPCS) Certificate organized under National/ State Council of Vocational Training Scheme;
OR Degree/Diploma in Computer Science/ Computer Applications /Information Technology from a University established by law in India or from an institution recognized by the Government;
OR Diploma in Computer Science & Electronics/Information Technology from a polytechnic institution recognized by the Government;
OR Certificate Course in Information Technology (RSCIT) conducted by Vardhaman Mahaveer Open University, Kota under control of Rajasthan Knowledge Corporation Limited 10.3 That qualification which is possessed by the petitioners are not as per the requirement specified under the provisions of the Rule 11 of the Rules of 1963 and Clause 6 of the advertisement.
10.4 That judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner are distinguishable for the reason that the said judgments pertains to the advertisement which was issued under the provisions of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 and allied (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) [2025:RJ-JP:14099] (14 of 14) [CW-197/2025] Rules for the post of LDC and circular dated 10.07.2018 issued by Additional Commissioner and Joint Secretary Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department as mentioned in Rehana Kousher (supra), wherein RS-CIT certificate will be considered as a requisite eligibility/qualification for the post of LDC, therefore, the said judgments cannot be made applicable qua the post in question.
10.5 That learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the letter dated 19.02.2025 issued by the IT Department of the State Government for considering certificate course on computer by NIELIT as a requisite qualification, howsoever, this Court is not inclined to comment on the said letter at this stage.
10.6 That the petitioners have approached this Court and assailed the said clause in the advertisement at a belated stage and that eligibility criteria for the post cannot be dealt under the powers of judicial review unless the same are arbitrary and erroneous, therefore, following the principle of acquiescence and principle of Wednesbury respectively, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present petitions.
11. Accordingly, the present petitions are dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
12. A copy of this order be placed in connected files.
(SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /134-149 (Downloaded on 05/04/2025 at 09:25:01 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)