VIKASH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that he having passed the written examination for appointment to the post of Constable under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (hereafter 'the Rules of 1989') held pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.5.2018, was called for the Physical Standard Test (PST) and thereafter required to participate in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) on 29.8.2018 at Vidhyadhar Nagar Stadium, Jaipur which entailed running 5 kms within the prescribed time. The petitioner submits that at the time the PET under the Rules of 1989 was conducted on 29.8.2018 at Jaipur, the running track was muddied for reason of heavy rains which resulted in obstructing the petitioner's performance up-to his potential and resultant failure. It has been prayed that the petitioner should in the circumstances be given bonus marks or be given another chance to participate in the PET, as given to several candidates, who failed the PET in the course of recruitment of Constables under the advertisement dated 25.5.2018.

(2.) Heard. Perused the petition. Considered.

(3.) Admittedly the petitioner's PET was held on 29.8.2018 at Jaipur. After not having raised the objection in completing the 5 Km. race at the relevant time allegedly due to heavy rain on 29.8.2018 at Jaipur where the petitioner's was held, the petitioner has belatedly approached this Court only on 6.2.2019 i.e. after a delay of over five months from the date of PET in which he was declared not qualified. There is also nothing on record to show that any grievance as now agitated in this petition was set forth by the petitioner at the relevant time. Contrarily the presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872 as to regularity of official acts obtains against the petitioner. The delay in approaching this court is both inordinate and unexplained evidencing that the case set up by the petitioner is a mere afterthought / with a cynical intent to misuse the discretionary jurisdiction of this court. That cannot be countenanced. Further the condition of the running track at the stadium in issue at the time relevant to PET is a question of fact which this Court would loath to belatedly address at this stage when the selection process has been largely completed and those selected have been appointed after undergoing the requisite training.