Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that non-disclosure of raw marks creates serious doubt for the simple reason that while issuing notice this Court specifically directed the respondent Rajasthan Public Service Commission to explain how without disclosure of the raw marks actually obtained by the candidates only on the basis of scaled marks the marks-sheet can be issued. In the reply to the aforesaid question sought by this Court, the respondents declared the raw marks of all the candidates and, in the reply, it is admitted for the query made by this Court that how the vacancies are increased after declaration of result of the RAS Main Examination 2012, it is submitted that a requisition was received by the RPSC from the Government on 11.10.2012 prior to declaration of the result of the preliminary examination, therefore, the Commission has acted in accordance with the rules and declared 25000 candidates successful in the preliminary examination so as to appear in the main examination. In the reply it is admitted that increased vacancies were not notified prior to declaration of the result of the Preliminary Examination but the Commission has acted in accordance with rules. Therefore, on this count, it is evident that total illegality has been committed by the respondent Commission while not disclosing the raw marks and not publishing the number of seats increased before the declaration of the preliminary examination result.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, following questions arise in this writ petition from the pleadings and the judgments cited by learned counsel for the parties for consideration :

A. Whether after advertisement dated 06.02.2012 increased vacancies for which admittedly no advertisement was issued by the respondents to inform the candidates prior to declaration of the result of the preliminary examination can be filled in under the advertisement dated 06.02.2012 ?

In this case, as per reply filed by the respondent Commission a requisition of increased posts was received by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission on 11.10.2012 vide Annex.-R/1 in which the detail of posts is given with regard to increasing the number of vacancies but in the communication dated 11.10.2012 (Annex.-R/1) it was specifically mentioned that, "कपय उक र ककय क सचन व ज वपत क पक श त व जप क पपत इस व भ ग क शभज न क शम क # ।". Learned counsel for the respondent Public Service Commission submitted that although no notification was issued to give information to the candidates that vacancies have been increased but, at the time of declaration of the result of preliminary examination, the candidates were declared successful in the ratio of 1:15 as per the increased number of vacancies, therefore, the contention of the petitioner is not sustainable that increased vacancies cannot be filled in.

Admittedly, the amendment was made in the Rules of 1999 on 31.07.2012 whereby complete procedure is changed and requisition for increasing the number of vacancies was sent to the Commission on 11.10.2012 after the date of amendment, therefore, there was no occasion for the respondent Rajasthan Public Service Commission to include those additional/increased vacancies in the present selection process because before receiving the information with regard to increasing the number of vacancies on 11.10.2012 the Rules of 1999 were already amended vide notification dated 31.07.2012. Therefore, the respondent Public Service Commission can proceed for recruitment up to the extent of number of vacancies advertised vide notification dated 06.02.2012. Increased vacancies are required to be filled in as per amended rules, therefore, the inclusion of the additional vacancies in the present process of selection is totally arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. Question-B :