RAJESH KUMAR RATHORE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 1. 9. 2003 with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Circular dated 16. 8. 2003 (Annex. R/1) issued by the Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner (respondent No. 2) directing that for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III, marks obtained in compulsory subjects of Vocational Course as well as marks obtained in optional subjects of Bridge Course would be taken into consideration, be quashed and set aside and further, the respondents be directed to prepare a fresh selection list ignoring directions contained in Circular Annex. R/1 dated 16. 8. 2003 and if the petitioner comes in merit, he may be given appointment.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner as putforward by him in this writ petition is as follows: THE petitioner passed the Secondary School Examination and thereafter, he passed the Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer in the year 1995 and a copy of the mark sheet of Sr. Secondary (Vocational) are marked as Annex. 2. THEreafter, the petitioner passed Certificate Court of Physical Education Examination, 1997 and a copy of the mark sheet is marked as Annex. 3. THE petitioner also passed the Bridge Course examinations. THE further case of the petitioner is that the respondent No. 2 Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner issued advertisement Annex. 1 dated 28. 7. 2003, which was published in the newspaper "dainik Bhaskar" on 30. 7. 2003, inviting applications for recruitment to the posts of Physical Training Instructor (P. T. I.) Gr. III. THE respondent No. 2 Director issued certain directions through Notification dated 31. 7. 2003 with respect to aforesaid recruitment to the posts Physical Teacher Instructor (PTI) Gr. III. In pursuance of the said advertisement Annex. 1, the petitioner being eligible applied for the post of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III alongwith the requisite documents. THEreafter, after scrutiny of the application forms, a provisional merit list was got prepared by the respondents and was published. According to the petitioner, in the said provisional merit list, the name of the petitioner was not included at proper place. THE further case of the petitioner is that after commencement of the recruitment process, the respondent No. 2 Director issued directions to all the District Education Officers, Secondary Education including respondent No. 3 through Circular Annex. R/1 dated 16. 8. 2003 and as per directions contained in clause (1) of circular Annex. R/1, for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III, the marks obtained in compulsory subjects of Vocational Course as well as marks obtained in optional subjects of Bridge Course would be taken into consideration. THE petitioner has challenged the aforesaid directions contained in clause 1 of Circular Annex. R/1 dated 16. 8. 2003 on various grounds and the main case of the petitioner is that the Circular Annex. R/1 was issued by the respondent No. 2 Director on 16. 8. 2003 and prior to that, selection process for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III had already commenced in pursuance of advertisement dtd. 28. 7. 2003 (Annex. 1) and therefore, subsequent issuance of the directions through clause (1) of Circular Annex. R/1 dated 16. 8. 2003 that for recruitment to the posts of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III had already commenced in pursuance of advertisement dtd. 28. 7. 2003 (Annex. 1) and therefore, subsequent issuance of the directions through clause (1) of Circular Annex. R/1 dated 16. 8. 2003 that for recruitment to the posts of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III, merit list would be prepared taking into consideration the marks obtained in compulsory subjects of Vocational Course as well as marks obtained in optional subjects of Bridge Course, was nothing, but an arbitrary exercise on the part of the respondents and furthermore, since these directions were issued after commencement of selection process and therefore, they would not affect the selection process, which had already commenced, and thus, the action of the respondents preparing merit list on the basis of impugned directions as contained in clause (1) of Circular Annex. R/1 is illegal, unreasonable and contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. A reply to the writ petition was filed by the respondents and their case is that directions as contained in Circular Annex. R/1 dated 16. 8. 2003 were issued by the Director (respondent No. 2) for preparing merit list for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III and as per clause (1) of Circular Annex. R/1, it was decided that while preparing merit list, the marks obtained in compulsory subjects of Vocational Course as well as marks obtained in optional subjects of Bridge Course would be taken into consideration and since it was a policy matter, therefore, the petitioner cannot challenge the directions contained in clause (1) of Circular Annex. R/1. Hence, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

(3.) THERE is also no dispute on the point that the respondent No. 2 Director through Notification dated 31. 7. 2003 issued certain directions with respect to aforesaid recruitment to the posts of Physical Training Instructor (PTI) Gr. III.