RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed on the ground of delay. The selection process was completed in the year 1998-99. It was challenged by the petitioner in the year 2001 by filing a writ petition in which the petitioner/appellant had set up a case that he had a degree from a university, which ought to have been accepted as a recognised degree and, therefore, the petitioner was eligible and ought to have been considered. Be that as it may, when the selection process was over in the year 1998-99 it could not have been challenged in the year 2001.

(2.) IN our view the learned Single Judge was perfectly justified in dismissing the writ petition on the ground of delay. Learned counsel for the appellant has cited before us a judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Smt. Chanda Devi vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (1), decided on 2. 08. 2001. However, following decisions of the Supreme Court were not noticed by this Court while deciding Chanda Devi's case. i. Ashok Kumar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2) ii. State of Bihar vs. Mohd. Kalimuddin (3) and iii. State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Harish Chandra (4)

(3.) IN view of the above decisions of the Supreme Court, we are unable to subscribe to the judgment rendered in the case of Chanda Devi by this Court. We are of the considered view that once the selection process is over, it cannot be reopened. Once appointments are made interests of appointed candidates come into play. When the number of seats are limited, relief cannot be given to any petitioner without displacing a candidate who has already joined. Therefore, as a matter of sound legal and equitable policy a selection process already completed ought not to be disturbed normally.