VIKRAM SINGH CHOUHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ-petitioner, a contender for the post of Civil Judge (JD)-cum-Judicial Magistrate First Class in the Rajasthan Judicial Service (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the Service"), seeks to invoke the extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court to adjudge his perceived omission on the part of the respondents to announce the cut off marks for the physically handicapped candidates in the recently concluded preliminary examination held in course of the process of direct recruitment initiated by the advertisement dated 25.11.2013 of the Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, to be illegal and invalid.

(2.) We have heard Mr.Rajak Haidar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.K.Mathur, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The facts lie in a short compass. In the aforestated advertisement for filling up 187 posts of Civil Judge (JD)-cum-Judicial Magistrate First Class in the Service, 5 were earmarked for physically handicapped candidates. The advertisement inter-alia disclosed in clear terms that reservation qua the physically handicapped candidates would be horizontal i.e. on their selection qua categories i.e. Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/OBC/ General/Women-they would be assimilated/integrated respectively in such category. The advertisement thus did not conceptualize the physically handicapped candidates to be a distinctly different category from those of General/Women/SC/ST/OBC and logically so according to the enjoinment of horizontal reservation. The scheme of selection envisages a preliminary examination followed by main examination and interview. Thus, clause 14(2) stipulated that the number of candidates to be admitted to the main examination would be fifteen times the total number of vacancies (category wise) but in the said range all those candidates who secure the same percentage of marks on the last cut-off would be admitted to the main examination. The other clauses of the advertisement being not pertinent for the issue seeking adjudication are not being referred to for the sake of brevity.