SANJAY KUMAR MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present indictment is of the second proviso to Rule 24 of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 (for short, hereafter referred to as 'the Rules') inserted vide notification No.F.1 DOP(3)/A-II/2010, G.S.R.No.35 dated 10.6.2011, amending the same. The gauntlet has been taken by up some of the candidates who, though had participated in the process for direct recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Judicial Magistrate (for short, hereafter referred to as 'Civil Judge') initiated by the advertisement dated 22.7.2011, had been eventually proclaimed to be unsuccessful therefor.

(2.) We have heard Mr.R.P.Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.Shashi Kant Saini for the petitioners, Mr.S.K.Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General, Rajasthan assisted by Mr.Gaurav Tanwar, for the State-respondent, Mr.S.N.Kumawat, learned counsel for the Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer (for short, hereafter referred to as 'the Commission/respondent-Commission') & Mr.A.K.Sharma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.V.K.Sharma, for the respondent-High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur (for short, hereafter referred to 'High Court' as well).

(3.) The vires of the above provision of the Rules under impeachment though, skeletal facts, borne out by the pleadings, are indispensable. To reiterate, the respondent-Commission had issued an advertisement dated 22.7.2011 for direct recruitment to 101 posts of Civil Judge, in terms of the Rules. The advertisement disclosed, amongst others, the conditions of eligibility and the extent of reservation in appointment, as per the break-up of posts, referred to therein. The petitioners, claiming themselves to be eligible, did respond to the advertisement. The exercise, designed in compliance of the Rules, comprised of a Preliminary Examination (objective type) and the Main Written Examination, followed by Interview of all the candidates successful in the said examination. The main examination consisted of Law Paper-I & Law Paper-II of 100 marks each and Language Paper-I in Hindi Essay & Paper-II in English Essay of 50 marks each. For the interview, 35 marks were earmarked. In terms of the scheme of examination, the Recruiting Authority was to call for the interview, such candidates who had obtained a minimum of 35% marks in each of the law papers and 40% marks in the aggregate. For Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes category candidates, the minimum percentages, on these counts, were fixed at 30% and 35% respectively. Incidentally, by the amendment, adverted to hereinabove, vide second proviso to Rule 24 of the Rules, it was prescribed that no candidate, who would fail to obtain minimum 25% marks in the interview, would be recommended. The number of candidates, to be called for the interview in accordance with their order of merit in the written test, was predicated to be approximately three times the vacancies reserved for each category.