Dharampal Gurjar vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

The petitioner applied for recruitment as Constable in the 4th Battalion RAC, Jaipur under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (hereinafter 'Rules of 1989'), pursuant to an advertisement dated 25.05.2018. Having passed the written examination he was required to participate in the Physical Standard Test (PST) and Physical Efficiency Test (PET) on 10.9.2018 at Shri Pratap Yadav Stadium, Chitrakoot, Jaipur. It has been submitted that the petitioner's admit card for PST/ PET was downloaded only on 8.9.2018 for reason of which the petitioner, a resident of a village in Tehsil Kotputli at a distance of about 109 Kms. from Jaipur, could not conveniently make himself available for PST/PET on 10.9.2018. This for reason that downloading of the admit card within time was obstructed as the petitioner was a resident of a rural area, where efficient and speedy internet facility was not available. It has also been submitted that because the race was overcrowded, as a result of which the candidates collided with each other and could not complete the race within the given time. It has been prayed that in the circumstances a second opportunity be allowed in the interest of justice to the petitioner to participate in the PET afresh and be considered for appointment based on his performance therein.

Dr. VB Sharma, AaG submitted that admit cards of the candidates for participating in PST/ PET for 4th Battalion RAC at the stadium in Jaipur were uploaded on 7.9.2018 and PST/PET was to commence on 10.9.2018 i.e. after a clear three day gap.

Aside of the petitioner, other candidates across the State of Rajasthan who applied for the post of Constable in 4th Battalion, RAC Jaipur and had passed the written examination also had their admit cards uploaded on 7.9.2018 on the Rajasthan Police Department's website, as was indicated in the conditions of the advertisement dated 25.5.2018 under which the recruitment was being made. They thereupon appear to have easily downloaded their admit cards with ease and participated in the PET at Shri Pratap Yadav Stadium, Chitrakoot, Jaipur from 10.9.2018. The petitioner himself also so did without demur. No grievance of the alleged short period between the downloading of the admit card for reason of inefficient internet services and holding of the PST/ PET was then made by the petitioner. There is also nothing in law or in the conditions of the advertisement dated 25.5.2018 which entitled the petitioner to notice of more than one clear day for the conduct of his PET. After not having objected at the relevant time, if at all the petitioner could, he took his chance and thereafter having failed, has belatedly approached this Court only on 3.1.2019 i.e. after a delay of over three months from the date of PET in which he failed. The delay in approaching this court is unexplained and infact indicates that the case set up by the petitioner is a mere afterthought/ with an cynical intent to misuse the discretionary jurisdiction of this court. That cannot be countenanced by the court. Further, appointments as Constable in the 4the Battalion RAC of those who participated in PST/PET at Shri Pratap Yadav Stadium, Chitrakoot, Jaipur on due date/s successfully have already been made and they are presently in training for over the last two months.

Heard. Considered.

I am of the considered view that in the facts of the case on record there is no force in the petition. Nothing from the petition or arguments made even remotely establishes, that the petitioner was in any manner obstructed technically or otherwise from giving his best at the PET held on 10.9.2018. The admit card of the petitioner for participating in the PST/PET at Shri Pratap Yadav Stadium, Chitrakoot, Jaipur was uploaded on the notified site of the police department well in time. The petitioner is also estopped from challenging the conduct of PET on 10.09.2018 in which he willingly participated. An allegation on the alleged unsubstantiated unfairness / arbitrariness at the PET on various grounds after failing it, cannot be permitted.

In addition to above, the petitioner had no right to insist that 5 km race in the course of PET not be conducted with other co-participants. Neither the conditions of the advertisement dated 25.5.2018 nor the Rules of 1989 support the argument of the petitioners' counsel that candidates seeking appointment for the posts of Constables could not be made to participate together in a race. It is evident that 5 km race was to be run individually by the candidate within the prescribed time. Co-participants in the race are of no relevance. Further there is nothing on record to establish that the petitioners at the relevant time when the race was held on 10.9.2018 agitated the issue of any prejudice by the race being held with co-participants, who had applied for the post of Constable (General). Nor the manner of prejudice has been set out.

Consequently, no case of contravention of any of the petitioner's legal or fundamental right is made out in this petition.

Nor has the petitioner been able to make out a case of any arbitrary action / omissions of the respondents to his detriment to warrant interference by this Court and issue of directions as sought.

The petition is accordingly dismissed.