Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Raghuveer Prasad Swami vs R S R T C And Ors on 18 February, 2011
Author: Prem Shanker Asopa
Bench: Prem Shanker Asopa
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER (1)S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.92/2011 Raghuveer Prasad Swami Versus Raj.State Road Transport Corporation and others (2)S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.249/2011 Indra Raj Versus Raj. State Road Transport Corporation and others DATE OF ORDER --- February 18,2011 PRESENT HONBLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Mr.Mohan Choudhary and Mr.Mahendra Sharma, for the petitioners Mr.Virendra Lodha and Mr.Ashok Bansal, for the respondents BY THE COURT
(1) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2) By these writ petitions, the petitioners, who applied for the posts of Driver, in pursuance to the advertisement No.152/2010-11 issued by the respondent Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (RSRTC), have challenged the Eligibility Condition.
(3) Pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioners appeared in the selection process for the post of Driver, held by the RSRTC, result of which has been produced before this Court in sealed cover. The result was seen and thereafter, re-sealed and returned back to the counsel for the RSRTC. As per the aforesaid result, the petitioners have been declared `failed' .
(4) Counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have challenged the eligibility criteria for the post of Driver, therefore, they may be allowed to appear in the trade test, which is going to be started in the first week of March, 2011.
(5) Further submission of counsel for the petitioners is that there are some cases pending in which even the eligible persons or similarly situated persons have not been allowed to participate in the selection process for the post of Driver, therefore, in case any direction for re-holding the examination afresh is issued, then the same may also be applied to the present cases also.
(6) Submission of Mr.Virendra Lodha and Mr.Ashok Bansal, appearing for the respondent RSRTC is that even the eligible persons who have failed to obtain the cut-off marks are not entitled to participate in the selection process. However, in these writ petitions, the eligibility criteria for the post of Driver is under challenge, but the whole selection process has not been challenged, therefore, the petitioners who have been declared `failed', their writ petitions are rendered infructuous. Even if, the selection criteria is quashed/modified, then also, there is no prayer to re-hold the selection afresh.
(7) I have gone through the record of the writ petition and further considered the aforesaid submissions.
(8) In my view, once the petitioners, who have been allowed to appear in the selection process for the post of Driver, have been declared `failed', they are not entitled to any further relief so far as the present selection for the post of Driver is concerned. Even the eligible persons, who have failed to secure the cut-off marks, are not entitled to participate in the further selection process and to appear in the trade test and interview, therefore, other questions are of academic interest so far as these writ petitions are concerned, and the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed at this stage.
(9) In case any final direction is issued by this Court for holding the entire examination afresh, then the petitioners are at liberty to move miscellaneous application in these writ petitions for claiming the relief of their participation in the aforesaid selection process.
(10) Accordingly, both the aforesaid writ petitions are dismissed, with the aforesaid liberty.
(11) Photo stat copy of this order be placed on the files of all the aforesaid writ petitions except CWP No.249/2011.
(Prem Shanker Asopa) J.
??pa?