SHANKAR LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging action of the respondents in not considering his case for appointment on the post of Physical Training Instructor (P.T.I.) Grade-III. The respondents by advertisement dated 28/7/2003 notified 37 vacancies for appointment on the said post, out of which 20 posts were reserved for General category candidates, 3 for Scheduled Castes, 4 for Scheduled Tribes and 10 posts for Other Backward Cases. The petitioner applied for such appointment. Interview for the aforesaid appointments took place on 3/9/2003.

(3.) Contention of Shri Chetan Kumar Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that call letter was received by the petitioner on 5/9/2003 asking him to appear in the interview on 3/9/2003. Learned Counsel has produced on record photostat copy of the envelop by which the call letter was received by him. According to the petitioner, this letter itself was received in the Post Office on 2/9/2003 but it was delivered to the petitioner on 5/9/2003 and by that time, interviews had already taken place on 3/9/2003. The petitioner immediately on receipt of call letter approached the respondent No. 3 namely; District Education Officer (Secondary) Alwar with his grievance, but he refused to consider the case of the petitioner. Resultantly, the other junior persons below in merit than the petitioner, have been selected and appointed, but the petitioner was denied the right to consideration for appointment. Learned Counsel relied on the judgment in the case of Surendra Kumar v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. WLC 2006 (1) 525 and argued that this Court in exactly identical circumstances, directed the respondents to appoint the petitioner.