Sita Ghotiya D/o Shri Ramchandra Ghotiya vs State of Rajasthan

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by

Division Bench decision dated 18.04.2017 rendered by this Court

at Jaipur Bench in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.247/2017 (State of

Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Rashmi Agrawal).

The case in brief are that the petitioner submitted her

application form for the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level I & II) for

the recruitment of 2013. At the time of submitting her application

form on 28.08.2013, she had stated her category to be widow,

however, subsequent thereto, she got re-married on 20.02.2015.

Petitioner''s candidature has been rejected by the

respondents in wake of the subsequent status of the petitioner,

which she acquired as a result of her re-marriage aforesaid.

Learned counsel for the respondents has filed the reply and

stated that the petitioner''s rejection on the ground of re-marriage

is lawful.

The issue at hand is squarely covered by Division Bench

decision dated 18.04.2017 in case of Rashmi Agrawal (supra).

The operative portion thereof is reproduced hereunder :-

"Having perused the impugned order we find no infirmity therein. The view taken is that eligibility is with reference to the last date of submitting the applications and not the declaration of the result. The respondent was a divorcee on the date when she applied. She got re-married when result were declared. Her entitlement for appointment under the divorcee quota has rightly been upheld.

The writ-appeal is dismissed. The stay application also stands dismissed.

No costs"

Vide aforesaid judgment dated 18.04.2017 the Division

Bench has affirmed the judgment dated 23.11.2016 rendered in

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15594/2016 (Rashmi Agrwal vs. State

of Rajasthan & Anr.). It will not be out of place to reproduce the

relevant portion of the judgment dated 23.11.2016 rendered by

the Coordinate Bench of this Court :-

"Two questions have arisen for consideration before this Court; (a) Whether a candidate who re-marry will lose status of Divorcee and (b) what is the reckoning date for determination eligibility of the candidate in the category of Divorcee.

It is not doubt that when the petitioner went to join her services, she was married lady, but it is also undeniable that when the petitioner applied and on the last date of submission of application form, the petitioner was Divorcee. Therefore, the status of the petitioner is to be

determined on the last date for submission of application form. A subsequent event cannot take away legal character of the petitioner, which existed on the last date for submission of application form. Surely, policy of the state is not to encourage that a Divorcee should remain Divorcee for ever.

Thus, a hyper-technical objection cannot be raised by the respondents qua the reckoning date for determination of the legal character of the petitioner, whether she was Divorcee or not on the last date fixed for submission of application form.

Since, on the last date for submission of application form, the petitioner was a Divorcee, she is entitled to appointment and joining in pursuance thereof.

Consequently, the present petition is allowed. The action of the respondents whereby petitioner has been denied appointment is set aside. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to join her place of posting within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order".

Following the aforesaid Single Bench judgment dated

23.11.2016 duly affirmed by Division Bench, vide order dated

18.04.2017, the present writ petition is allowed. Petitioner''s

rejection on the ground of her re-marriage is quashed and set

aside.

Respondents are directed to give appointment to the

petitioner in accordance with law and issue order of

appointment, if she falls in merit list and is otherwise eligible.

The needful be done within a period of eight weeks from today.