Sudhir Kumar Meena vs Rajasthan University Health Sciences and Others

Veerender Singh Siradhana, J—Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner sought accommodation since the arguing counsel was not available yesterday. Arguments advanced on behalf of the counsel for the respondents were concluded and the matter was posted for today to accorded opportunity of hearing to the counsel for the petitioner and for dictation of order.

The petitioner, in the instant writ petition has assailed the legality and validity of the advertisement dated 7th January, 2012 (Annex.8), for not providing reservation to the members of Scheduled Tribe and therefore, has approached this Court praying for the following relief(s):--

"(a) By an appropriate writ, order or directions the action of the respondents in issuing advertisement Annexure-8 dated 2.1.2013 to fill in the posts of Assistant Professors under different streams of Dentistry only out of the candidates of unreserved category to be wholly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, unjustified and unconstitutional;

(b) By an appropriate writ, order or directions the respondents be directed to reserve 3 seats for ST category in the advertisement dated 2.1.2013 and further be directed to consider the petitioner entitle and eligible to be called for exam/interview for the post of Assistant Professor (Prothodontics) as a candidate under the reserved category of Scheduled Tribe for filling in the posts declared vacant in Government Dental College, Jaipur;

(c) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions and in alternate, quash and set aside the advertisement-dated 2.1.2012 issued by the respondents vide Annexure-8 being wholly illegal and unconstitutional;

(d) By an appropriate writ, order or directions, respondents be directed to call the petitioner as one of candidates out of reserved category of ST for his selection and appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (Prosthodontics) in Government Dental College, Jaipur;

(e) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions in alternate directing respondents to issue & publish fresh advertisement inviting online applications for filling in posts of Assistant Professors under different streams of Dentistry declaring therein posts under reserved category of ST also;

(f) Issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which may be considered just and proper in favour of the petitioner in the circumstances of the case.

(g) By an appropriate writ, order or directions cost of writ petition may kindly be allowed to petitioner."

Shorn off unnecessary details, the indispensable skeletal materials facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised are that the petitioner acquired the degree of Master of Dental Surgery in the examination conducted in May, 2009, from the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences. The petitioner was eligible for consideration for appointment to the post of ''Assistant Professor'' (Prosthodontics), however, his candidature was not considered. Again, in response to another advertisement dated 2nd January, 2013, wherein online applications were invited from eligible and qualified candidates for appointment to five posts of Assistant Professors in different streams of Dentistry; the petitioner submitted his application for consideration of his candidature. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that in the advertisement dated 2nd January, 2013, no reservation was indicated for the candidates from SC/ST/OBC category. The representations submitted on 21st November, 2011, 22nd November, 2011 and 24th November, 2011, evoked no response, and therefore, instituted the present writ proceedings.

Mr. Ajay Sharma appearing on behalf of the petitioner reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application argued that since the advertisement did not indicate any reservation for the reserved category in the impugned advertisement; the action of the respondents is illegal and violative of mandate of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. According to the learned counsel, the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (respondent-University), has been established under the Rajasthan University for Health Sciences Act, 2005, and thus, it is "State" within the meaning of the Article 12 of the Constitution of India and is obliged to comply with the mandate of the statutory provisions providing for reservation to the reserved category.

Referring to the educational qualifications, learned counsel submits that after having acquired the qualification of Bachelor of Dental Surgery (in short ''BDS''), in the year 2003, from K.V.G. Dental College Sullia, Karnataka. The petitioner has also completed one year internship (Housemanship) from Government Dental College, Jaipur, in the department of Oral Medicine and Diagnosis, Community & Prev. Dentistry, Oral Surgery, Prosthodontics, Orthodontics, Paedodontics, Periodontics & Operative Dentistry in the year, 2004. The petitioner completed his Master Degree in Dental Surgery in May, 2009 and has been serving as Assistant Professor (Prosthodontics) in the Rajasthan Dental College, Bagru, Jaipur.

Learned counsel further asserted that the respondent-University failed to provide reservation to the candidates of reserved category even in the advertisement dated 23rd September, 2011, while recruitment was conducted for appointment in different streams for Government Dental Colleges, Bagru, Jaipur. The representations made evoked no response.

By the advertisement dated 2nd January, 2013, the respondents again initiated the recruitment process for appointment to the post of ''Assistant Professor'' in different specialties for teaching course for Government Dental College as would be evident from advertisement (Annex.8), without providing for any reservation to the reserved category. Thus, the advertisement issued by the respondents is patently illegal, arbitrary, unjustified, and unconstitutional being contrary to the reservation policy of the State.

In response to the notice of the writ application, respondent No. 1, has filed its counter affidavit stating that Government Dental Colleges and Hospitals are Constituent Colleges of the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences. It is further contended that there are only three posts of Assistant Professor (Prosthodontics) and as per reservation roster given in the first and Second Schedule of the Rajasthan Reservation of Appointment and Posts in Services under State (Roster) Rules, 2009, first 4 posts are to be filled from Unreserved category.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent reiterating the pleaded stand in the counter affidavit asserted that the respondent-University initiated recruitment process to fill up the third post of ''Assistant Professor'' (Prosthodontics), and according to the roster maintained under the Rules of 2009, the same is required to be filled from Unreserved category. Learned counsel would further submit that the representation submitted by the petitioner was considered by the ''Core Committee'' of the respondent-University for recruitment of the posts involved herein.

The statement made and facts pleaded in the counter affidavit, have not been disputed by subsequent pleadings be it an additional affidavit or rejoinder, by the petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the materials available on record as well as earnestly considered the rival submissions at Bar.

In the schedule annexed to the Rules of 2009, the first reservation point for the Scheduled Tribe Category would be at ninth place in the roster. Schedule-1 under the Rules of 2009 has been prepared and maintained in compliance of the Rule 4 of the Rules of 2009, which contemplates that the roster is to be operated on the principle of replacement and not as a "running account" as hitherto.

The points at which reservation for different categories applies are fixed as per the roster and vacancies caused by retirement of persons occupying those points shall be filled by appointment of persons of the respective categories.

Neither there is any challenge to the legality and validity of the Rules of 2009, which provides for reservation to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Special Backward Classes and Economically Backward Classes, as per the rules framed under the Act of 2008, nor the fact that the respondent-University has undertaken appointment for first four posts, has been disputed. Therefore, the action of the respondent-University cannot be faulted.

For the reasons and discussions hereinabove, the writ petition is devoid of any substance and lacks in merit, and therefore, deserves to be dismissed.

Ordered accordingly.

No costs.

The stay application stands closed.