Apsara W/o Shri Devanand And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners raising several issues pertaining to the recruitment on the post of Safai Karamchari.

It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that though most of the issues raised in the present writ petitions would be governed by judgment of this Court in the case of Ravi Jajot v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10496/2018, decided on 30.8.2018 and that the petitioners shall take appropriate proceedings in accordance with the said judgment and directions therein.

However, one additional aspect has been argued that in the earlier recruitment vide instructions (Annex.2), it was indicated that priority will be given to the candidates belonging to Valmiki and Hela Communities, however, in the present recruitment, no such stipulation has been made, which is against the interest of the petitioners and that the recruitment made / sought to be made without such stipulation, therefore, is bad.

Learned AAG appearing for the respondents made submissions that all the previous instructions have been superseded by way of fresh instructions issued in the present recruitment vide Annex.R/6 and even when the earlier instructions were issued in the year 2013, the same had no basis in the statute.

Further submissions have been made that looking to the procedure now adopted, even otherwise no priority could be given to candidates of any particular community and, therefore, the issue raised has no substance.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

A perusal of the Annex.2, which pertains to the directions issued in the year 2013 indicates that earlier the recruitment was to be made by the committee constituted for the purpose and therein the provision was made for giving priority to the candidates belonging to Valmiki and Hela Communities, however, with the amendment in the provisions, the present recruitment is to be held through draw of lots (lottery) and, therefore, the claim of grant of priority to candidates belonging to a particular community, cannot be countenanced.

Further, once all the existing instructions have already been superseded by way of fresh instructions (Annex.R/6), based on which, the recruitment is being held, on account of any earlier instruction, the petitioners cannot claim any right of priority as submitted.

Further, even when the earlier instructions were issued, they had no statutory basis and presently also, the statute does not envisage grant of such priority as claimed by the petitioners and, therefore, in those circumstances, the entire claim made by the petitioners being baseless, no direction as claimed by the petitioners can be issued to the respondents.

In view of the above discussion, there is no substance in the fresh point sought to be raised by the petitioners. Rest of the issues, as submitted by counsel for the petitioners, are governed by judgment in the case of Ravi Jajot (supra). The petitioners may proceed as per the directions contained in the Ravi Jajot (supra), in case, they have any grievance/s.

With the above observations and directions, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners stand disposed of.