MAMTA GAWAN AND ORS. Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE all these writ petitions involve a common controversy and are all preferred challenging the legality of a common show cause notice dated 17.4.2015 served on the petitioners proposing to cancel their appointments and the consequential termination order dated 8.5.2015 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5010/2015 (Mamta Gawan v. State and Anr.) and 5011/2015 (Manju Bala v. State and Anr.) from the civil posts of J.En. allegedly without following the procedure prescribed under law thus, are being decided by this common order.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated the facts relevant and necessary for the disposal of these writ petitions are noted hereinbelow: - -

(3.) THE petitioners have set up a case that by the time the advertisement came to be issued, they had commenced their final year academic session of B.E./B.Tech Civil Engineering Course in their respective universities/colleges and thus were to appear in the final year exam as mentioned in the above quoted clause of the advertisement. Two kinds of academic sessions are run by different universities and colleges; annual system and semester system. The case as set up by the petitioners is that normally, throughout the country, the academic sessions of engineering courses commence in July and culminate somewhere in April or May. The final results are declared around the months of July -August in any of the above academic systems. The petitioners further claim that, taking cue from the above quoted clause of the advertisement and as all of them were to appear in the final examination of the qualifying degree course, a bonafide and genuine belief was created in their minds that they were covered by the above mentioned clause of the advertisement and were entitled to apply in the selection process. Accordingly, they applied for the competitive examination to be held for the posts of J.En. advertised vide the advertisement dated 11.9.2013. While filling up the application forms, as directed in the advertisement, the petitioners herein mentioned "APP (applied)" in the relevant column of the form. The date of examination as mentioned in the advertisement was originally 10.11.2013 but was postponed and the petitioners were issued call letters for appearing in the written examination to be conducted at Jaipur on 12.1.2014. The petitioners appeared in the written examination and after evaluation of the answer sheets, all the petitioners were declared successful and stood high in the merit. It is claimed that as the petitioners secured much above the cut off marks and as they held the requisite qualification, appointment orders dated 11.8.2014 were issued offering appointment to the petitioners on the posts of J.En. on probation basis for a period of two years and directing them to join at different places in the Divisions/Sub Divisions of the Water Resources Department of the State of Rajasthan. They were also directed to have their testimonials checked and verified by the reporting officer at the time of joining. The petitioners claim that they had acquired the qualification of B.E./B.Tech by the time of joining, as required under the advertisement, and thus they reported for joining with their testimonials including the final year marks -sheets. The reporting officers verified their documents and they were allowed to assume charge of their posts. They were satisfactorily discharging their duties, when out of the blue, they received a notice dated 17.4.2015 (Annexure -8) whereby they were directed to show cause as to why their appointment should not be cancelled. The language of the notice has a material bearing on the fate of the instant writ petitions and is thus being reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference: - -