BRIJESH KUMAR GAUTAM v. STATE PANCHAYATI RAJ DEP ANR
CW/283/2014 · 2025-03-17
Sameer Jain
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14066 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14066 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:11808] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 283/2014 Brijesh Kumar Gautam S/o Shri Chiranji Lal, Aged about 36 years, R/o Village & Post-Mandawari, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Secretariat, jaipur.
2. The Zila Parishad Barmer through its Chief Executive Officer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.P. Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sara Parveen, Adv.for Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment 17/03/2025
1. The present is filed with the following prayers:-
“1). by an appropriate writ order or direction the respondents be directed to appoint the petitioner with all consequential benefits on the post of Teacher Grade- III Level-II (Class-VI to VIII) in English subject against the one unfilled vacancy which is lying vacant due to non joining of one candidate. 2). any other order or direction, which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. 3). Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.”
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that an advertisement was issued in the Year 2012 inviting applications for the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-II). It is further submitted
[2025:RJ-JP:11808] (2 of 3) [CW-283/2014] that respondents informed the petitioner under the report received via RTI on 25.11.2013 that one candidate has not joined on the post advertised, resultant to which one seat against the General category is lying vacant. Therefore, petitioner being the next meritorious candidate should be selected for the said post. It
is further submitted that petitioner has approached this Court without any delay. 3. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Pawan Kumar Agarwal vs. General Manager -II and Ors., reported in (2015) 15 SCC 184 and Jubair Bhati vs. Rajasthan High Court and Ors., registered as D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17047/2022 decided on 11.07.2024. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has raised objection qua the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that in the instant matter, as on date, no interim order is operational and selection process qua the said post is concluded long back. It is further submitted that fresh recruitment process qua the said post is carried out and no seats are lying vacant. 5. Heard and considered. 6. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, upon scanning of the records, taking note of the judgments cited at the Bar, this Court has made the following observations:-
6.1. That recruitment for the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) pertains to the Year 2012. 6.2. That vide order dated 21.02.2025, petitioner was granted opportunity to place on record relevant documents to substantiate
[2025:RJ-JP:11808] (3 of 3) [CW-283/2014] the contentions, howsoever, no such documents are placed before this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6.3. That judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are on distinct factual matrix as that of present petition. 6.4. That as on date, no seats are lying vacant qua the said post and fresh recruitment process is carried out. 7. Relying upon the dictum enunciated in the judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Shankaran Dash Vs. Union of India reported in (1991) 3 SCC 47 and State of Orissa and Anr. Vs. Raj Kishore Nanda and Ors.
reported in (2010) 6 SCC 777, wherein, it is held that successful candidates do not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed and select list should not be treated as a reservoir for the purpose of appointments, moreover, if the selection process in respect of certain number of vacancies is over, it is not open to offer appointment to persons from the unexhausted select list. 8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed. (SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /286