SHRAVAN KUMAR CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved by the dismissal of his writ petition. He had complained of arbitrariness in the selection process, i.e. - that the track conditions while conducting the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) were poor inasmuch as the track on which he was made to run was water logged and unfit. The appellant had relied upon the learned Single Judge's ruling in Revant Ram Meghwal and Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. [S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13731/2018, decided on 27/11/2018].

(2.) The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground, inter alia, of delay, since the writ petition was filed after the decision in Revant Ram (Supra).

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant made various submissions. Firstly, it was urged on the basis of findings of Revant Ram (Supra), that the track conditions were undoubtedly poor. In support Mr. Mardia, learned counsel relied on certified photographs stated to be taken at the site and pointed out that the track was extremely wet. He next submitted that the appellant had in fact qualified the run and completed it in 24 minutes for which he could obtain only 5 marks. Mr. Mardia, learned counsel submitted that the appellant fell short by two marks and, therefore, missed being in the select list. More substantially, it was urged that the denial of appropriate conditions amounted to deprivation of fair and objective basis for determining the merit and physical efficiency of the candidate.