SATYA KANT BHATI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO principal contentions have been raised in the writ petition. First contention is based on Proviso to Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Services of Engineers (Building & Road Branch), Rule, 1954. The Rule 21 reads as follows: - "rule 21. Recommendation of the Commissions; The Commissions shall prepare a list of candidates, whom they consider suitable for appointment to the Service, arranged in order of preference and forward the same to Government. Provided that the Commission may to the extent of 50% of the advertised vacancies keep names of suitable candidates on the reserve list. The names of such candidates may, on requisition, be recommended in the order of merit to the Govt. within six months from the date on which the original list is forwarded by the Commission to the Government. "

(2.) IT is urged on the basis of the proviso aforesaid that it was obligatory for the Commission to keep names of suitable candidates to the extent of 50% on the reserve list. I do not agree with the submission, because in the main provision, the expression used is 'the Commission shall prepare a list" , while in the proviso, the expression used is. . . . "keep names of suitable candidates on the reserve list. " The difference in the phraseology in the main provision and the proviso goes to show that proviso was neither meant to be obligatory nor mandatory but left the discretion with the Commission to prepare the reserve list.