Chhagan Lal @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following reliefs:

“A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of

Teacher Grade III Level II in the category of TSP OBC with category of TSP OBC instead of OBC for the Zila Parishad of Udaipur in pursuance of

the advertisement year 2013.

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to afford the petitioner appointment on the post of Teacher

Grade-III Level-II in the category of TSP OBC with all consequential benefits in pursuance of the advertisement year 2013 if otherwise he stands in

merit.

C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, therespondents may kindly be directed to provide the benefit of notification dated 16.06.2013 consider the

candidature of the petitioner in TSP OBC category in pursuance of notification dated 16.06.2013.â€​

Learned counsel for the parties agree that the controversy is covered by the judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Joshana Patel Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4751/2015) on 04.12.2017. The judgment reads as under:

“1. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs :-

“A. By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of

Teacher Grade III, Level-I in the category of TSP OBC (WE) with category of TSP OBC (WE) instead of OBC (WE) for the Zila Parishad of

Udaipur in pursuance of the advertisement year 2013.

B. By an appropriate writ order or direction, therespondents may kindly be directed to afford the petitioner appointment on the post of Teacher Grade

III Level-I in the category of TSP OBC (WE) with all consequential benefits in pursuance of the advertisement year 2013 if otherwise he stands in

merit.

C. By an appropriate writ order or direction, therespondents may kindly be directed to not to deny the appointment and not to reject the candidature on

the ground of filling of wrong category i.e. OBC (WE) Category in place of TSP OBC (WE) category.

D. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction,which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case

may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

E. Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awardedto the petitioner.â€​

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that thepetitioner is female candidate, who participated in the selection process for the post of Teacher

Grade-III arising out of the advertisement in the year 2013. The petitioner having good academic record and having qualified RTET of 2011 and being

candidate of area of TSP District Udaipur participated in the process.

Admittedly, the whole controversy is that the petitionersubmitted the form under the category of OBC Women. The petitioner’s case is that

they should have been considered in their respective category but since respective category was not available in this particular Zone of TSP area,

therefore, the petitioner ought to have been considered as General Category candidate in the TSP area.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further statedthat the petitioner is not seeking any reservation in any category and therefore, it is not a case

of category change but merely the petitioner have to be considered in the TSP General which is the open category. Learned counsel for the petitioner

has stated that being in the open category or General category did not amount to category correction as the advertisement for this particular Zone was

for TSP area only.

Learned counsel for the respondent has however, statedthat the petitioner did not write TSP and therefore, they could not given preference as TSP

General category candidate.

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing therecord of the case, this Court takes note of the fact that the broadly the area in question was

TSP area and thus, the petitioner who was a women of OBC category and has filled OBC Women as her category is not seeking any improvement in

her category or merit but simply she is seeking consideration in the General category open recruitment seats for Teacher Grade-III. However, without

making any comment on merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner for being

treated as a TSP General category women candidate in open category where the local residents have been given preference. The respondents shall

pass a speaking order within a period of 30 days from submission of such representation and until the final orders are passed, the interim order granted

by a coordinate Bench of this Court on 10.10.2017 shall remain in currency.

With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposedof.â€​

In light of the aforementioned precedent law, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the representation

submitted by the petitioner within a period of 30 days from today.