Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Mukesh Chandra Byas vs State (Education Department)Ors on 2 November, 2012
Author: M.N. Bhandari
Bench: M.N. Bhandari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15674/2012 (Mukesh Chand Byas Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) Date of Order : 02nd November, 2012 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI Mr.Gaurav Sharma, for the petitioner/s. BY THE COURT:
It is stated that petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer (ABST Branch) and was entitled for reservation in the quota meant for disabled persons. The grievance of petitioner is for declaring him to be unsuccessful in the selection despite being the only candidate in the disabled category.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that minimum marks in the selection is not provided under the rules, thus the only candidate available in the quota meant for disabled persons should have been allowed appointment.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel and perused the order passed by the RPSC at Annex.2 dated 09th May, 2012. The perusal of the said order reveals that minimum qualifying marks was provided for the selection. It was 45% for reserve category and 50% for general and OBC category. The petitioner secured 44% marks only, thus it is less than the required qualifying marks even if it is taken to be 45%. In view of the above, the relief prayed made by the petitioner cannot be granted because one cannot be declared successful even if he is failed to secure required minimum marks.
So far as the argument that rule does not provide minimum marks in the selection is concerned, I find that rule provides for determination of criteria of selection by the appointing authority or the Commissioner as the case may be. In the case in hand, the RPSC has conducted selection and they provided minimum qualifying marks, thus the action of respondent-RPSC cannot said to be in violation of rules to provide minimum qualifying marks to select candidates. In fact, same standard has to be laid down to select candidates even if he is in reserve category. It should not be that without setting out standard for selection, a candidate should be given benefit of appointment only for the reason that nobody else has applied for the post in his category. Even in the government employment, not only standard is required but meritorious candidates should be selected as they would be ultimately served the public.
In view of discussion made above, I do not find any illegality in the action of the respondent/s, accordingly the writ petition so as the stay application are dismissed.
(M.N. BHANDARI), J.
S/No.39 Preety, Jr.P.A. All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.
Preety Asopa Jr.P.A.