Surendra Singh Rathore @APPELLANT@Hash State Of Rajasthan

The matter today comes up for order on the application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India submitted by the respondents.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition itself is being finally heard and decided today itself.

The petitioner Surendra Singh Rathore has approached this court by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a

direction to the respondents to allow him to participate in the selection process initiated for the post of Judicial Assistant and to give him appointment

on the said post in case the petitioner stands on merit.

The bone of contention of the petitioner in this writ petition is that he has been wrongly and illegally deprived from participating in the recruitment

process on a totally frivolous ground that he could not submit the proper identification documents while appearing at the Examination Centre in the

Phase-I of the Examinations.

Shri Rohitash Singh learned counsel representing the petitioner vehemently and fervently urges that the petitioner appeared at the examination hall

with the Aadhar Card wherein there was a slight omission regarding the name of the petitioner’s father. However, the admit card issued to the

petitioner bears the name of the petitioner’s father and thus, the respondent authorities should not have adopted an absolutely hyper-technical

approach while denying permission to the petitioner from appearing in the Phase-I Examination. He thus urges that the writ petition be accepted and

the respondents be directed to hold fresh recruitment examination for the petitioner.

Per contra, Shri Ravi Bhansali learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Vipul Dharnia and Ms.Dipika Purohit representing the respondents vehemently

and vervently opposed the submissions advanced by Shri Rohitash Singh. Shri Bhansali drew the Court’s attention to the following stipulation in

the recruitment notification:

“9. Identity Verification

In the examination hall as well as at the time of documents verification, the call letter along with original and a photocopy of the candidate’s

currently valid photo identity (bearing exactly the same name as it appears on the call letter) such as PAN Card/Passport/Permanent Driving

Licence/Voter’s Card/Bank Passport with photograph/Photo identity proof issued by a Gazetted Officer on official letterhead along with

photograph/Photo identity proof issued by a People’s Representative on official letterhead along with photograph/valid recent Identity Card issued

by a recognized College/University/Aadhar card/E-Aadhar Card with a photograph/Employee ID/Bar Council Identity Card with photograph should be

submitted to the invigilator for verification. The candidate’s identity will be verified with respect to his/her details on the call letter, in the

Attendance List and requisite documents submitted. If identity of the candidate is in doubt the candidate may not be allowed to appear for the

Examination.†and urged that it was clearly intimated in the notification that while appearing at the examination hall, the candidate would be required

to hold a valid photo identity bearing the exactly the same name as it appears in the call letter. He urges that admittedly, the Aadhar Card which the

petitioner brought at the examination hall on the date of the Phase-I Examination was not having the name of his father. He further submits that even

in the admission card provided to the petitioner, it is clearly stipulated that the valid photo identity tallying with the description of the admission card is

essential. As per him, all participants had been given option of bringing any identity proof viz. PAN Card, Passport, permanent driving licence etc. The

petitioner failed to comply with the mandatory instructions and brought along the Aadhar Card in which the name of his father was not mentioned. He

further submits that while entertaining the writ petition, this Court had directed that the petitioner shall be provisionally permitted to appear in the

selection process by order dated 13.7.2018.

However, the said interim order was challenged by filing a Letters Patent Appeal No.1450/2018 wherein, the Hon’ble Division Bench was

pleased to stay the effect and operation of the order dated

13.7.2018. He makes a statement at the Bar that thereafter, the Phase-I & Phase-II Examinations have been concluded. 40% marks of the Phase-I

Examinations have to be added in the final evaluation and since the petitioner has not appeared in any of the examinations, the matter has virtually

become infructuous. On these grounds, he craves dismissal of the writ petition.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at the Bar and have gone through the material available on record.

Indisputably, the petitioner is an educated man. The instructions given in the recruitment notification reproduced hereinbefore and in the admission

card issued to the petitioner, clearly mandate as an essential precondition that the aspirant would have to carry a current photo identity (viz. PAN

Card, Passport, permanent driving licence etc.) card bearing the exact details as appearing in the call letter. The same condition in stronger words is

incorporated in the admission card as well. The photo identity i.e. Aadhar Card carried by the petitioner at the examination hall was not compliant with

the requirements of the recruitment notification and the admit card because his father’s name was not mentioned therein. The respondents were

thus definitely entitled to restrain the petitioner from appearing in the examination. Even if an extra benevolent approach is adopted, then also now it is

too late in the day to provide any relief to the petitioner. Phase-I & II Examinations have been concluded. It was the emphatic statement of Shri

Bhansali learned senior counsel that 40% weightage would be given to the marks secured by the candidates in the Phase-I Examination and that even

the Phase-II Examination has been completed and now only the result is to be declared. The interim direction given by this Court to permit the

petitioner to appear in the Phase-I Examination vide order dated 13.7.2018 has been reversed by the Hon’ble Division Bench. There is no mention

to show that the petitioner appeared in the Phase-II Examination.

In this background, this Court is of the firm opinion that the petitioner does not deserve any relief whatsoever in exercise of the extraordinary writ

jurisdiction of this Court.

As a consequence, the writ petition as well as stay application are dismissed as being devoid of merit.