RAJKAMAL BASITHA Vs. RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of petitions arises in similar back ground. The principal challenge of all the petitioners is to the ongoing recruitment process undertaken by the High Court administration for direct recruitment to the District Judges in the Rajasthan Judicial Service. The petitioners are all those candidates who had appeared in response to the advertisement issued by the High Court administration on 5/1/2021 in which in all 85 vacancies in the cadre of District Judge for direct recruitment were notified. 23 vacancies were for general category candidates out of which six were set apart for women candidates which would include one vacancy for a widow. There was bifurcation of the remaining vacancies for different reserved category candidates such as SC/ST, OBC, EWS and MBC. In each reserved category also there was sub-bifurcation in favour of women candidates.

(2.) As per the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the said Rules of 2010') and in particular Rule 40, the recruitment would be made on the basis of competitive examination in accordance with Schedule-III. The procedure would be held in 3 stages i.e. preliminary examination, main examination and interview to test the candidate's knowledge and fitness for appointment. The marks obtained in the preliminary examination by a candidate who is called for the main examination will not be counted for determining his final merit. As per sub-rule (3) of Rule 40 of the said Rules of 2010, the number of candidates to be admitted to the main examination will be to the extent of 15 times the total number of notified vacancies (category-wise). In the said range all those candidates who secure same percentage of marks will be admitted to the main examination. As per sub-rule (4) of Rule 40 of the said Rules of 2010, on the basis of marks secured in the main examination, candidates to the extent of 3 times of total number of notified vacancies shall be declared qualified to be called for interview. Rule 41 provides that the Court shall prepare the merit list category-wise on the basis of aggregate marks obtained in the main examination and in the interview considering the suitability in general. Proviso to Rule 41 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in any rule or schedule, and having regard to the requirement of efficiency in service, the Court may determine such cut-off marks as considered fit for being recommended for appointment. Select list of the successful candidates would be prepared as provided under Rules 42 and appointment be offered as provided under Rule 43 of the said Rules of 2010.

(3.) The preliminary examination was conducted by the High Court on 25/7/2021. This examination contained objective questions with multiple choices and had no negative marks prescribed. The result of this examination was declared on 16/9/2021. The cut-off marks for different categories was prescribed as under:-