Gurdev Singh @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan

This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ or direction may kindly be issued and

respondents may kindly be directed to offer the appointment to petitioner on the post of patwari in District Sri Ganganagar as per his first priority of

posting.

Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.â€​

Learned counsel for petitioner states that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment of Shiv Prasad Nimiwal Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.9371/2014) decided on 20.07.2015. The judgment reads as under :-

“The petitioner, who belongs to OBC Category was selected on the post of Teacher Gr.II (Science Subject) in pursuance of a selection process

conducted by the RPSC in the year 2011. The respondents acted arbitrarily in the manner of giving posting to various candidates contrary to the merit

of the candidate concerned, upon which the petitioner and numerous other aggrieved candidates approached this Court by filing writ petitions. The writ

petition preferred by the petitioner being S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.11332/2011 was decided by this Court vide order dated 11.11.2011 with the

following directions:

“(A) The respondents shall look into the individual matters with reference to the requirements of the aforesaid order dated 09.11.2011 taking it

applicable to all the similar and akin cases; and shall ensure that all the posting orders are issued without the vice of arbitrariness after taking policy

decision at the earliest.

(B) The petitioners, whether maderepresentation earlier or not, shall be at liberty to make the representation afresh to the respondents stating their

grievance and the respondents shall be expected to consider each representation on its merit and take decision curbing against any vice of

discrimination.

(C) It is made clear that earlier joining by thepetitioners shall not be of prejudice to them in taking recourse to the appropriate remedies in accordance

with law if any grievance remains after the respondents frame the policy and take the decision on the individual's representation.â€​

The petitioner claims that he stood at Sr.No.731 in the merit and having secured more than the cut off fixed for the General Category, he was moved

up to the General Category applying vertical reservation. However, OBC candidates much below the petitioner in merit were given posting in their

home division, whereas the petitioner, who is a resident of District Churu was posted at Jaisalmer. The petitioner submitted a representation pursuant

to the directions given by this Court in the above writ petition. The said representation was dismissed by order (Annex.5) stating that OBC candidates

were given preferential posting in their own division but since the petitioner having secured higher marks was moved to General Category as per his

merit, he was not considered fit to be given posting in his home division. Learned counsel submits that the order is apparently arbitrary and illegal on

the face of the record. He submits that the petitioner was selected against the General Category seats because he stood higher in merit even though

belonging to OBC category. This was on account of vertical reservation. Despite this and rather than giving due credit to the petitioner’s

performance, he has been penalised by being posted in a different division and has not been given a posting in the home division as per his merit

position amongst the OBC candidates. Learned counsel submits that admittedly, OBC candidates standing at Sr.Nos.1005, 1008 and 1025 in merit

were provided postings in Churu District (their home division) but the petitioner has been deprived of this right even though he stood higher in merit

amongst the OBC candidates. He contends that the action of the respondents in this regard is grossly arbitrary and contrary to the directions given by

this Court in the petitioner’s earlier writ petition. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition deserves to be accepted.

Learned GC feebly attempted to defend the impugned order. However, he too candidly conceded that the petitioner being an OBC category candidate

having stood higher in the merit was entitled to be considered for a preferential posting in his division as per his merit position before lesser meritorious

candidates in the OBC category. He also is not in a position to defend the order (Annex.5), which states that for the purpose of posting, the petitioner

was considered in the General Category. Having heard and considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after going

through the impugned orders as well as the pleadings, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order (Annex.5) suffers from the vice of

arbitrariness and also runs contrary to the directions given by this Court while deciding the petitioner’s earlier writ petition by order dated

11.11.2011.Â

In this view of the matter, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned order (Annex.5) is declared illegal and is set aside.

The respondents are directed to give posting to the petitioner as per his merit position treating him to be in the OBC Category. Necessary orders shall

be passed in this regard within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of copy of this order. Stay petition is also disposed of. No order as

to costs.â€​

In light of the aforequoted judgment, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light

of the aforesaid precedent law within a period of 30 days from today. It is needless to say that it shall be the joint responsibility of all the respondents

to make such consideration.