JAI PRAKASH JOSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner applied for the post of Junior Engineer in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the Department dtd. 2/4/2013. A corrigendum to the advertisement was issued on 30/4/2013 and in Clause No. 9 of the said corrigendum, the revised process for selection was mentioned. Clause No. 9 of the corrigendum advertisement dtd. 30/4/2013 is reproduced herein, which reads as under:

(2.) A provisional list for selection was issued by the Department in which the name of the petitioner found place and the total marks obtained by him were mentioned to be 76.98. However, the petitioner was not finally selected, in which case, he preferred a writ petition before this Court which was registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12737/2013. Vide order dtd. 3/4/2014, the writ petition of the petitioner was disposed of with the following directions:

(3.) In pursuance to the directions issued by this Court, the petitioner moved representation dtd. 10/4/2014 before the concerned authority and when the same was not responded to, he served a legal notice dtd. 7/7/2014 to which a response dtd. 3/9/2014 was received and it was informed that the representation of the petitioner had been decided and the petitioner had already been informed of the same vide letter No. 1762 dtd. 11/6/2014. It was further stated in the communication that as the experience certificate obtained by the petitioner was prior to the date of obtaining technical degree, he was not entitled to the 30 marks qua his experience. So, after deduction of 30 marks from his total obtained marks of 76.98, he was left with 46.98 marks only and therefore, his name did not reflect in the final select list.