Santosh Punia vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

The petitioner vied for the post of PTI Grade-III, 2018, advertised vide notification dated 26.09.2019.

The petitioner having cleared the written examination, was invited to take part in the counseling.

At the stage of counseling, all the candidates, including the petitioner, were required to furnish an option form in relation to District in which they

preferred to be posted.

The petitioner, who stood in merit No.2148 in OBC Women category, had opted Bikaner District, as her first preference.

The petitioner has been given appointment in Pali District.

The petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that some of the candidates mentioned at serial No.6483, 8705, 8913 and 11767 in merit

list, have been accorded posting at Bikaner District, whereas she has been given posting in Pali District, regardless of her higher merit.

A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents interalia stating that the candidates qua whom the petitioner has raised grievance,

belong to OBC-Widow/Divorcee’ category and, thus, their cases cannot be equated with the case of the present petitioner.

It has been asserted in the reply that these four candidates stood higher in merit in their respective categories in OBC-Widow and General-

Divorcee and, thus, their request was accepted; while petitioner’s choice of posting in Bikaner District could not be acceded to, as she stood much

lower in her own category i.e. OBC-Women.

Considering the stand taken by the respondents (para No.7 of the reply), this Court is of the view that the petitioner has not been meted with any

discriminatory treatment â€" she has been accorded posting according to her own merit.

The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.

Stay petition also stands dismissed accordingly.

In case stand of the respondent, as indicated in para-7 of the reply, is found erroneous or factually incorrect; the petitioner will be free to move

appropriate application for revival of the writ petition.