Devendra Kumar Meena vs . State Of Rajasthan & Anr.

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/