Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Devendra Kumar Meena vs . State Of Rajasthan & Anr. on 10 April, 2015
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
1
S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7187/2009
Devendra Kumar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
ORDER
S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7187/2009 Devendra Kumar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
Date of order : 10.4.2015 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA Mr.Sandeep Shah, for the petitioner.
Mr.Khet Singh, Mr.Anil Bissa, AGC, for the respondents.
<><><> Heard.
By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has appraoched this Court seeking a direction to the respondents for giving him the benefit of the notification (Annex.4) dated 12.9.2007, whereby it was decided to grant special reservation to persons residing in the Tribal Sub Plant (TSP) areas.
As per the facts set out in the writ petition, the respondent RPSC issued an advertisement dated 9.4.2007 for conducting an examination to fill up the vacancies on the posts of Sub Inspectors (Police). The petitioner applied for and appeard in the examination held in pursuance of the advertisement. The result was declared on 27.3.2009 but the petitioner was not selected. The petitioner's grievance is that the benefit of the notification (Annex.4) was required to be extended to the area of Tehsil Sarada which was declared to 2 S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7187/2009 Devendra Kumar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. be a TSP area under the notification much before the examination was held. The petitioner would have qualified, had the notification applied to Sarada. In order to claim benefit of the notification (Annex.4), the petitioner has placed on record of the writ petition, another advertismenet dated 15.6.2007 (Annex.11) for direct recruitment to the subordinate services. The petitioner's case is that though the advertisement was issued on 15.6.2007 i.e. much before the TSP area notification, but later on, by a circular dated 15.3.2008, the RPSC in the same selection process invited applications from the persons belonging to the TSP areas whereby the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates, who had appeared in the said examination were asked to furnish their TSP certificates so as to be extended the benefit of TSP area notification (Annex.4). The petitioner has set up a case that as the result of the examination in which the petitioner appeared was declared in the month of March 2009 and thus, the benefit of the circular (Annex.4) should have been extended to the selection process wherein the petitioner appeared akin to the action taken in the selection process undertaken through the advertisement dated 15.6.2007 wherein, the RPSC extended the benefits of the circular by issuing a corrigendum (Annex.12) dated 15.3.2008.
Shri Sandeep Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the relevant date for applying the 3 S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7187/2009 Devendra Kumar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reservation would be the date on which the result is declared. He submits that the action of the authority in giving effect to the circular in context to the date of the examination is not justified, inasmuch as, the effect of the reservation can be assessed only after the result is declared which, in the petitioner's case was admittedly much after the notification (Annex.4) became effective. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition deserves to be accepted and the respondents be directed to extend the benefit of the circular dated 15.3.2008 to the petitioner.
Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents vehemently urged that the advertisement (Annex.11) from which the petitioner has set up a case of discrimination itself mentioned that the examination for recruitment would be held in the month of October 2007. By that time, the circular declaring TSP area reservation for the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes communities was promulgated and thus, it became essential to extend the benefit thereof to such candidates and that is why the circular dated 15.3.2008 (Annex.12) was issued requiring such candidates to submit their caste certificates so that the benefit of circular could be extended to them. They submit that if at all, the prayer made in the instant writ petition is accepted, it would amount to applying the circular retrospectively, which is neither permissible nor feasible as per law. They, therefore, 4 S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7187/2009 Devendra Kumar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. pray that the writ petition is meritless and should be dismissed.
Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar and perused the material available on record.
Undisputedly, the process wherein the petitioner applied was initiated through the advertisement issued in the month of April 2007. The examination for selection was held in the month of August 2007. The notification dated 12.9.2007, whereby TSP area reservation was declared was notified and published in the official Gazette on 12.9.2007 and therefore, obviously the benefit of such reservation was not required to be extended to the candidates, who had appeared in the examination conducted before the publication of the notification. Any such action would amount to giving a retrospective effect to the notification declaring an area specific reservation, which in the opinion of this Court, is not permissible. So far as the petitioner's claim that the action of the respondents in giving benefit of the TSP area reservation to such candidates, who appeared in the recruitment examination pursuant to the advertisement (Annex.11) dated 1.6.2007 is concerned, the same is also of no avail whatsoever to the petitioner for the simple reason that the advertisement itself stipulated that the probable date of the examination would be in the month of October 2007. By that time, the TSP area reservation was notified and therefore, any selection 5 S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7187/2009 Devendra Kumar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. process conducted thereafter had to be governed by the said notification. As a consequence, the petitioner's claim that he should be extended the benefit of TSP area reservation introduced by the notification (Annex.4) on the ground of parity is unacceptable. It is further relevant to note that the selection process wherein, the petitioner seeks a direction for appointment was completed long back. No interim protection was provided to the petitioner. Thus, otherwise also, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed in the writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed.
No order as to costs.
(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.
/tarun/