[2025:RJ-JP:34526] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7334/2023 Lalita Bai Meena D/o Shri Ghasiram Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Alei, Post Moonpur, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest (H.O.F.F.), Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Chief Conservator Of Forest, Jaipur (Raj.). 4. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur through its Secretary, Rajasthan Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.D. Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Adtiya Singh, Dy. G.C. Mr. Aditya Sharma on behalf of Mr. Satish Kumar Khandal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 28/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner participated in the recruitment examination conducted by the Rajasthan State Selection Board, Jaipur for the post of Forest Guard and Forester, in which she succeeded in initial process of recruitment examination and was called for physical efficiency test, which was conducted on 16.02.2023 and 17.02.2023. However, since at that time her pregnancy was at advanced stage, therefore she was not medically advised to appear in the physical efficiency test, hence she prayed for [2025:RJ-JP:34526] (2 of 4) [CW-7334/2023] direction in the instant writ petition for extending the time granted for assessing physical efficiency of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the writ petition and stated that it was made clear vide office order dated 06.02.2023 that the physical efficiency test were conducted between 13.02.2023 to 17.02.2023 and all the qualified candidates were directed to appear in such physical efficiency test, failing which no separate physical efficiency test shall be conducted. In view of above, the prayer made by the writ petitioner is totally misconceived and the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed. 4. Heard and considered. 5. The issue in hand has already been examined by the Division Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18808/2015 (Laxmi Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 30.05.2017, in which question was framed as to whether a delay of two years in the physical/efficiency test following the written examination during which a woman candidate became pregnant would entitle her to seek postponement of the date of her physical examination or such date cannot be postponed to the detriment and rejection of the woman candidate. 6. After examining the rules and conditions of the advertisement as well as the prohibitory conditions put by the recruitment agency, the Division Bench of this Court finally observed as under: "Once it is observed & held that maternity is a human right of a woman and so longer the married woman is not disqualified from participating in the selection process and [2025:RJ-JP:34526] (3 of 4) [CW-7334/2023] is not an impediment and after having qualified the written test, at the stage when she has to undergo the Physical Standard Test/Physical Efficiency Test became pregnant with advanced stage and the pregnancy being not a disability but one of the natural consequence of marriage, the woman candidate deserves indulgence of qualifying the physical standards after affording a reasonable time in attaining fitness which the authority may consider to be appropriate keeping in view the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. Based on the aforesaid discussion, we are of the view that there can be no conclusion other than to hold that action of the respondents in not granting indulgence to the petitioners in failing to qualify Physical Standard Test/Physical Efficiency Test because of their advanced stage of pregnancy is illegal and arbitrary and the impugned provisions of the Standing Orders to the extent they lay down that pregnancy would render a candidate unfit is legally not sustainable." 7. It is clear by perusing the aforesaid judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court that the issue is not required to be examined again and has already been put to rest. 8. In view of above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and respondents are directed to permit the petitioner for her physical efficiency test pursuant to recruitment process in continuation of the advertisement dated 11.11.2020 and to issue a fresh call letter to her in this regard for appearing in the Physical Efficiency Test at least 10 days after the date of issuance of the call letter and in case the petitioner qualifies with the standard laid down under the relevant Scheme of Rules, and her name finds place in order of merit in her respective category, then she may also be considered for appointment on the post of Forester in accordance with the Rules. [2025:RJ-JP:34526] (4 of 4) [CW-7334/2023] 9. In the light of above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner stands allowed. Necessary exercise may be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/62