Prem Singh Jodha vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for seeking direction to the respondents to consider his case under the category of ex-servicemen for appointment to the post of Patwari in pursuance to advertisement dated 19.2.2013 (Annex. 3) and provide appointment on the post of Patwari with all consequential benefits.

As per the facts of the case, after completing the tenure of service in Indian Army, the petitioner was discharged from service in the month of July, 2001 from the post of Nayak (Time Scale LD). The petitioner being ex-serviceman (general) field an application in the police department for appointment on the post of Constable and after facing the selection process, he was provided appointment on the post of Constable on 24.7.2003 and posted at Jaisalmer.

The appointment on the post of Constable was provided to the petitioner under the reserve category of ex-servicemen (general).

The District Collector, Jaisalmer advertised on 19.2.2013 for the post of competitive examination known as Director Recruitment Patwar Competitive Exam., 2013 was conducted. The petitioner again filed an application under the category of ex-servicemen and he was allowed to appear in the competitive examination in which petitioner was declared successful and his name was placed at S. No. 44 under the category of general ex-servicemen as he has obtained 95.22 marks.

After passing examination, the petitioner was directed to appear before the concerned authorities alongwith the documents for verification, after verification of document, a final list of direct recruitment was issued, in that list, the name of the petitioner does not find place, therefore, being aggrieved with the non-inclusion of his name for appointment under the category of ex-servicemen, a representation was filed by the petitioner before the respondents, so also, the petitioner personally met the respondents to consider his case for appointment under the category of ex-servicemen.

The respondents gave its reply that as per circular dated 24.11.2002 you are not entitled for reservation under the category of ex-servicemen twice, therefore, your candidature under the reservation for ex-servicemen has been rejected on account of circular dated 14.11.2002.

The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that denial of appointment to the petitioner on the post of Patwari in pursuance of the circular dated 14.11.2002 is totally arbitrary and contrary to the basic principle of law because the petitioner is well qualified and having vast experience to work in Indian Army, therefore, he is very much entitled to get appointment on the post of Patwari under the category of ex-servicemen. It is also argued that the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected in very casual manner on the baseless ground that benefit of reservation to the ex-servicemen cannot be granted twice, therefore, the denial of benefit provided for ex-servicemen to the petitioner for the pot of Patwari is against the principles of natural justice because there is no such rule in existence except the circular issued by the government on 14.11.2002 whereby directions are issued to all the departments not to grant benefit of ex-servicemen twice, the circular dated 22.11.2002 is contrary to the basic principles of law and principles of natural justice. On above grounds it is prayed that circular dated 14.11.2002 (Annex. 10) may kindly be quashed an respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under the category of ex-servicemen on the post of Patwari as per his merit and issue appointment order.

Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that benefit of reservation under the category of ex-servicemen can be granted to the ex-servicemen once, not time and again because such benefit is required to be given without any discrimination to all the ex-servicemen candidates for their welfare, therefore, to provide equal opportunities it is felt necessary by the State Government to issue circular dated 14.11.2002 in which it is provided that benefit of reservation under the category of ex-servicemen shall not be given twice. In view of the above, the case of the petitioner was considered in general category because earlier he was provided appointment on the post of Constable in the police department under the category of reservation provided for ex-servicemen in the year 2003, further, it is submitted that the circular dated 14.11.2002 was issued by the government for providing equal opportunity of reservation to the ex-servicemen candidates in which there is no illegality.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I have perused the circular dated 14.11.2002 placed on record, as Annex. 9, which reads as under:-

In my opinion, the aforesaid circular has rightly been issued by the Government because once benefit is given to the ex-servicemen for appointment on the post of Constable and he joined the duties then in the event of filing another application for another post, he can be treated in-service candidate not ex-servicemen. In the present case the petitioner after discharging the service from Indian Army considered for appointment on the post of Constable in Police Department in the year 2003 and at present also, he is working as Constable in the Police Department, therefore, obviously, it cannot be said that petitioner is entitled for benefit of reservation time and again because he has already been granted benefit of such reservation under the category of ex-servicemen and after availing the said benefit, while working on the post of Constable field another application for appointment on the post of Patwari was made, therefore, it is a case in which the petitioner can be treated in-service candidate not ex-servicemen of Army.

It is true that welfare State is under obligation to provide certain benefits to the ex-servicemen but at the same time, this Court cannot loose sight of the fact that such chance can be given once in the life because State cannot violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India in the category of ex-servicemen, therefore in the opinion of the court, the circular dated 14.1.2002 is perfectly justified in view of the fact that benefit of ex-servicemen can be claimed by the ex-servicemen once after discharge from army and that benefit has already been availed by the petitioner, therefore, there is no question to declare the circular dated 14.11.2002 issued by the government as illegal or discriminately. More so, the said circular is perfectly within the parameters of constitutional provision. It is also very material to mention here that the pay scale of patwari and constable is same, therefore, it cannot be said that petitioner being ex-servicemen is claiming higher status than the status of the post of Constable.

In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is hereby dismissed.