Ghanshyam vs The Secretary, Ministry of Education and Others

Govind Mathur, J.—This review petition is preferred to review the judgment dt. 05.01.2007 passed in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 937/2006. By the judgment aforesaid, the Division Bench accepted the special appeal preferred by the State of Rajasthan giving challenge to the judgment dt. 17.03.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5452/2003.

Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the respondents under an advertisement dt. 28.07.2003 invited applications from eligible candidates to be considered for appointment as Physical Training Instructor, The process of selection was prescribed by the respondents under the notifications dt. 17.01.1998 and 21.01.1998. As per the notifications referred above, an incumbent participating in National Level Sports Meet was entitled to have 15 bonus marks while getting his candidature considered for appointment as Physical Training Instructor. The persons participating in the State Level Tournaments were entitled to have 10 bonus marks. The Inter Zone University/Inter University tournaments under the notifications aforesaid were shown as National Level Tournaments. The respondents did not allow 15 bonus marks to the petitioner though he participated in an Inter University Tournament thus, he preferred a petitioner for writ before this Court and that came to be accepted under the judgment dt. 17.03.2005.

Suffice to mention that while contesting the writ petition, the stand of the respondents was that the criteria for selection was modified under a notification dt. 31.07.2003 and as per the amended criteria, a person participating in Inter University Tournament was entitled only to have 10 bonus marks and those were given to the petitioner.

Learned Single Judge by relying upon certain other judgments passed in other similar matters held that the petitioner was entitled for 15 bonus marks in view of the fact that on the date the vacancies were advertised, the circular dt. 31.07.2003 providing amended criteria was not in existence and at the relevant time the process of selection was required to be made as per the notifications dt. 17.01.1998 and 21.01.1998.

Being aggrieved by the judgment dt. 17.03.2005, the State of Rajasthan and other respondents preferred an appeal, that came to be accepted by the judgment under review dt. 05.01.2007 by relying upon an another Division Bench judgment in the case of Ganesha Ram v. State of Rajasthan [D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 195/2004].

In review petition, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that as a matter of fact, the judgment passed by the Division Bench in the case of Ganesha Ram (supra) was relating to an advertisement issued subsequent to 31.07.2003 and as such, in that case the procedure given under the notification dt. 31.07.2003 was to be applied, whereas the petitioner applied for consideration of his candidature for appointment as Physical Training Instructor under the notification dt. 28.07.2003, wherein procedure required to be adopted was as per the notifications dt. 17.01.1998 and 21.01.1998.

The factual position mentioned above has not been disputed by learned Government Counsel.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

As already stated, the petitioner forwarded his candidature to be considered for appointment as Physical Training Instructor in pursuant to the advertisement dt. 28.07.2003 and at that time, the notifications dt. 17.01.1998 and 21.01.1998 were in currency. An amendment in the procedure was made under the notification dt. 31.07.2003, i.e. subsequent to 28.07.2003. A Division Bench in the case of State of Rajasthan and Others Vs. Umesh Jangid, arrived at the conclusion that while making appointments against the vacancies advertised under the advertisement dt. 28.07.2013, the procedure required to be adhered was as per the notifications dt. 17.01.1998 and 21.01.1998, wherein Inter Zone University/Inter University Tournaments were shown as National Level Tournaments. So far as case of Ganesha Ram (supra) is concerned, that pertaining to an advertisement issued subsequent to 31.07.2003.

In this factual background, we are of the opinion that the order dt. 05.01.2007 suffers from a material factual error and that warrants review of the same. Accordingly, this review petition is allowed. The order dt, 05.01.2007 passed in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 937/2006 is recalled. Let D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 937/2006 be listed for hearing in the first week of August 2013.