Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Shailesh Soni S/O Shri Bansi Lal Soni vs Rajasthan Public Service Commission ... on 31 January, 2019
Author: Alok Sharma
Bench: Alok Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.385/2019
Shailesh Soni S/o Shri Bansi Lal Soni, Aged About 35 Years,
Resident Of 19, Narayan Nagar, Behind Blood Bank, Near
Jaipuria Hospital, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary,
Ghooghara Ghati, Ajmer (Rajasthan).
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Tanveer Ahamad
For Respondent(s) : Mr.M.F. Baig
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
Order
31/01/2019
Heard the counsel for the parties.
Mr.M.F. Baig counsel for the respondent- RPSC
submitted that in the instant case, in the event the petitioner's category were to be changed to OBC DC (Departmental Candidate) to OBC as prayed in the petition no third party rights would be affected. He submitted that consequently the RPSC will allow the petitioner to participate in the RAS/ RTS Main Examination, as a OBC candidate when the RAS/ RTS Main Examination, 2018 is held as the petitioner a OBC candidate with (2 of 3) [CW-385/2019] 88.14 marks has a higher mark than the cut off mark of 76.06 for the General category candidate.
In view of the submission of Mr.M.F. Baig, this petition is accordingly disposed of. It is directed that the petitioner be allowed to change his category to OBC (DC) from the OBC category in which inadvertently he applied for reason of a typographical error in his online application form.
However, I am of the considered view that this petition has been occasioned not for any wrongful action, arbitrariness or illegality attributable to the respondent- RPSC, but the cause of action for whatever its worth in this Article 226 petition under the Constitution of India is wholly rooted in the reason of the petitioner's own gross negligence in failing to rectify, in the manner provided for by the RPSC, the inadvertent mistake in his online application form. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was fundamentally crafted for the protection of legal and fundamental rights of the citizens and for ensuring the statutory obligation owed to them by the authorities, were duly discharged. The jurisdiction of this Court was not crafted to facilitate rectification of errors attributable the (3 of 3) [CW-385/2019] negligence of the citizens which errors they failed to rectify despite an opportunity.
In this view of the matter, even while this petition has been allowed in the overall interest of justice, the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards costs to the respondent- RPSC for the reason that it has been drawn in this litigation unjustifiably and will further have to incur administrative costs to record the requisite rectification of the petitioner's own self generated mistake followed by reckless negligence to rectify it despite an opportunity.
(ALOK SHARMA), J Himanshu/13 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)