RAJESH JAIN Vs. RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions have been preferred with respect to the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service Examination for which 58 posts were advertised on 15.04.2010, out of which, 36 were to be filled by direct recruitment and 22 were by limited competitive examination, to be conducted under Rajasthan Judicial Services Rules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2010). Writ petition No.568/2011 has been filed by the direct recruits, who are applicants for the aforesaid posts to be filled up by way of direct recruitment and other two writ petitions No. 15482/2010 and 16647/2010 have been filed by the Senior Civil Judges-cum - Judicial Magistrates, who are applicants for the posts to be filled by way of limited competitive examination. In these writ petitions, decision of the Full Court cancelling examinations and deciding to hold examinations afresh has been assailed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 30.03.2010, Rajasthan High Court had issued a notification, which was published in various newspapers, on 15.04.2010 inviting applications from practicing advocates for filling up vacant posts in the cadre of District Judge by direct recruitment in the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Services under the Rajasthan Judicial Services Rules, 2010. As per the said notification, 36 posts were advertised against the quota of direct recruitment to be filled from amongst practicing lawyers/ advocates, out of which, 20 posts were meant for the general category including 6 posts for women, apart from this, 5 posts were reserved for scheduled castes candidates including 1 post for scheduled castes women, 4 posts were reserved for scheduled tribes candidates including 1 post for women and 7 posts were reserved for the OBC candidates including 2 posts for women candidates. The notification contains the scheme of examination for the recruitment to the posts in issue, as per the Rules of 2010. The scheme comprised of written examination and thereafter an interview to test the suitability of the successful candidates. Pursuant to the advertisement dated 15.04.2010, the petitioners applied for the posts in issue and they appeared in the examination conducted under the Rules of 2010 on 30.06.2010 along with about 3400 other candidates. On 16.08.2010, the result of written examination was declared. Only 37 candidates fulfilled the requirement of minimum marks in the written examination under the Rules of 2010. The petitioners were amongst the successful candidates. On 30.08.2010, the Rajasthan High Court issued a notice notifying the dates of interviews for the candidates who were found successful in the written examination. The interviews were to be commenced at Jaipur from 01.09.2010 to 08.09.2010. The interviews of the successful candidates including petitioners were however postponed sine die.

(3.) Considering the various representations submitted by the members of different Bar Associations in respect of irregularities alleged to have been committed during the written examination for direct recruitment as well as in limited competitive examination held on 30.6.2010 in pursuance of Rules of 2010 and in the result declared on 16.8.2010, the then Chief Justice constituted a Committee of three Judges consisting of Justice Ajay Rastogi, Justice G.K. Vyas and Justice M.N. Bhandari vide order dated 03.09.2010 and 16.09.2010 for examining the grievances of agitating lawyers and also to give suggestions for resolving the dispute. The Committee after considering the various representations of the Bar Council as well as Bar Associations and the entire matter including the Rules of 2010 submitted its report on 21.09.2010. The Committee found that for the purpose of direct recruitment, in all 3413 candidates appeared in the examination, out of which, 37 were declared successful, including 4 candidates who had appeared under the respective interim orders passed by the High Court and their matter was still sub-judice. The Committee also noted that 197 applications were received for limited competitive examination to be held for District Judges Cadre out of which 145 candidates were found to be eligible.In all 112 candidates/ officers appeared and 14 were declared successful in the written examination. The Committee further noted that before the selection could be made after holding the interview, agitation was started by the lawyers. Hence, interviews for both the categories were deferred sine die. Before the Committee, the Chief Coordinator of Lawyers Agitation submitted a letter on 21.09.2010 conveying that they do not want to allege regarding corruption in the process of selection and the representation submitted by them be considered only on legal grounds. Thus, the allegations of corruption made in the representations were withdrawn and they were not pressed.