Hans Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

Judgment

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur

3. Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

4. Secretary, Department Of Irrigation, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

5. Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur

6. Secretary, Department Of Phed, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1827/2011

Shiv Karan Sivota Son Of Shri Om Prakash Sivota, Jawahar Basti, Sujan Garh, District Churu Versus ----Appellant

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Personale, Secretariat, Jaipur D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1828/2011

1. Kalu Ram Son Of Shri Aidan Ram, 7/69, Bada Baas, ----Respondents [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (2 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011] Inside Suraj Pole, Jalore, Rajasthan

2. Vikram Singh Verma S/o Shri Ramswaroop Verma, House No. 59, Hari Nagar, Near Birla School, Jodhpur, Rajasthan

3. Madan Lal Rajoria Son Of Shri Prabhudayal, Govt. Model Girls School, Nazar Bagh Kothi, Sunder Vilas, Ajmer, Rajasthan ----Appellants Versus

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Personale, Secretariat, Jaipur ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1829/2011

1. Pranav Kumar S/o Shri Hari Ramaged, Village Bhobia Tehsil Chirawa District Jhunjhunu Sc

2. Harish Kumar Mahawar S/o Shri Chiranji Lal, C-253, Hans Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur ----Appellants Versus Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer ----Respondent D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1835/2011

1. Chandra Prakash Meena S/o Shri Jamna Lal Meena, B-11, New Master Colony, Khan Pur Road, District Jhalawar

2. Narendra Kumar Rawal S/o Roda Ram Rawal, Plot No. 66, Tagore Nagar, Kartarpura Jaipur

3. Sita Ram Bairwa S/o Nand Ram Bairwa, Village And Post Rehlana Via Dudu District Jaipur

4. Prashant Jaiswal S/o Sh. Laxman Singh, Plot No. 26B, Acfc Colony, Ratanada, Jodhpur

5. Kailash Ram S/o Shri Rama Ram, Dhawa Post Nokha- Chandwana Via Gotan District Nagaur Raj. ----Appellants Versus [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (3 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011]

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. Rakesh Kumar Narnolia S/o Banshidhar, Village And Post Nawalri, Via Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu

3. Jai Ram Das S/o Ukara, House No. Aa-3, Mahaveer Nagar District Barmer

4. Yaminii Agri D/o Kesar Lal Agri, Plot No. 40, Street No. 6, 22 Godam, Jaipur

5. Gaurav Kumar Jatav S/o Rambeti Jatav, H-75, Sector No. 14, Hiran Magri, District Udaipur

6. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Ramji Lal Yadav, 38, Brij Vihar, Goner Road, Jagatpura, Jaipur

7. Naveen Kumar Mahavar, C-253, Hans Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1836/2011 Chandra Prakash Verma S/o Shri R.s. Verma, House No. 59, Hari Nagar, Near Birla School, Jodhpur, Rajasthan ----Respondents Versus ----Appellant

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Personale, Secretariat, Jaipur

3. Amar Chand Meena S/o Brahma Nand Meena, R-404, Padam Villa, Near Dig Office Bharatpur ----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 2258/2011 Dugesh Nandini Daughter Of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Bairwa, Plot No. 17, Krishna Naga-B, 80 Ft Road, Near Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan Versus ----Appellant

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (4 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011] Personnel, Secretariat, Jaipur D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 2609/2011 Niranjan Meena Son Of Shri Ram Lal Meena, Plot No. 11/339, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur ----Respondents Versus ----Appellant Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Chairman ----Respondent D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 2610/2011 Rajesh Agri Son Of Shri Kesar Lal Agri, House No. 40, Street No. 6, Behind Hawa Sadak, 22 Godam, Jaipur Versus ----Appellant

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

2. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Chairman D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 86/2012 Ram Niwas Raigar S/o Deva Ram Raigar, Aguna Mohalla, Ward No. 20, Mukungarh, District Jhunjhunu Raj. ----Respondents Versus ----Appellant Rajasthan Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary, Ajmer ----Respondent D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 368/2012

1. Niranjan Singh Son Of Shri Chiranji Lal , By Caste Jatav Sc, House No. 32, Gopal Vihar Nandpuri, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur

2. Rakesh Kumar Mahariya S/o Shri Mohan Lal Mahariya, By Caste Jatav Sc, 102A, Rameshwar Dham Murlipura, Jaipur

3. Kashi Prasad S/o Shri Dana Ram Maghwal, By Caste Jatav Sc, 102A, Rameshwar Dham Murlipura, Jaipur [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (5 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011]

4. Manik Pal S/o Shri Sharman Lal, By Caste Jatav Sc, Village Sainthara Post Dhaurmai, District Bharatpur ----Appellants Versus

1. The Rajasthan Public Commission Through Its Chairman, Ajmer

2. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Personnel Secretariat, Jaipur ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. David Mahila for Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kuri with Mr. Dharma Ram, Mr. Harshvardhan Shekhawat & Ms. Nandini Mirdha HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI 27/01/2025 Order These appeals have been filed on behalf of the appellants challenging the judgment and order dated 07.09.2011 whereby the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition made the following observations:- “In view of the discussion made above, application of scaling of marks cannot be said to be proper in the present matter. However, as observed earlier, I am not inclined to disturb the selection already made, hence, these writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions as otherwise given by Hon’ble Apex Court in Para 42 of the case of Sanjay Singh (supra), wherein, without disturbing the selection, appropriate directions were given, which have already been quoted in the preceding paras-

1. If the aggregate of raw marks in the written examination and interview of any [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (6 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011] of the petitioner in his/her category is less than the raw marks in the written examination and interview of the last selected candidate in his/her category, he/she would not be entitled to any relief;

2. Where the aggregate of raw marks in the written examination and interview of any of the petitioner in his category is more than the raw marks in written examination and interview of the last selected candidate in their categories, he would be considered for appointment in respective category by counting his appointment against future vacancies. Similar directions were given by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Singh (supra) which are coming out from perusal of para 42 of the said judgment; Above relief will be available only to 3. those petitioners who have secured minimum passing marks for appearance in the interview. This is after taking into consideration the raw marks in the written examination;

4. Aforesaid exercise may be undertaken by the respondents within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order; So far as prayers for grant of 5. relaxation in the marks to the reserved category candidates and other issues in respect of rule 14 raised by the petitioners, are not accepted. The petitioners, who have failed to qualify selection by obtaining required marks in individual paper or in aggregate would be entitled for any relief, however, it should be assessed on the raw marks obtained by them; and

6. It is expected of the respondent Commission that in future they will take proper care as to whether method of scaling or moderation has to be applied so as to avoid similar controversy in a case where only examiner variability exist. [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (7 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011] In view of disposal of the writ petition, stay applications also stand disposed of.” Learned counsel for the Appellants prayed for listing the matter tomorrow i.e. 28.01.2025. However, considering the fact that matter pertains to recruitment on the post of Assistance Engineer (Civil/Electrical) which was issued long ago in the year 2008 we are not inclined to adjorn the matter. According to record, no interim order was passed by this Court while rejecting the application for interim relief. Learned counsel for the respondent(s) submits that the advertisement in question pertains to the year 2008 for appointment on the post of Assistance Engineer (Civil/Electrical) in Public Work Department, Irrigation Department and Panchayatiraj Department of the State. He further submits that selection process has already been completed and thereafter further recruitment has been made for the aforesaid post on various occasions. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. These appeals filed on behalf of the appellant(s) deserved to be dismissed for the reasons being. Firstly, that the advertisement in question pertains to the year 2008 and selection process has already been completed. Secondly, as per statement made by counsel for the respondent, further selection process in subsequent years has already been made and persons have appointed on the aforesaid post. Therefore, we are in complete agreement with the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge [2025:RJ-JP:3788-DB] (8 of 8) [SAW-1825/2011] and we are not inclined to disturb the appointments already made after so many years. In that view of the matter, these appeals stands dismissed. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J SAURABH /93-103