Rajasthan High Court: In a writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Division Bench of Pushpendra Singh Bhati, and Madan Gopal Vyas, JJ., referred to Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 2 SCC 673 and opined that the broad question of law for consideration would be that “Whether candidate(s) can be allowed to change their respective category to a special category subsequent to the initiation of a recruitment process on count of subsequent widowhood, or disability or any misfortune, which can be caused by force majeure at any stage before final merit is declared, if such candidate(s) are otherwise eligible to participate in the recruitment process under the changed category?”
While framing the aforesaid broad question of law, the Court opined that it is conscious of the fact that being a bench of co-equal strength and having an opinion that such categorical relaxation of permitting the petitioner to appear as a widow candidate in the recruitment in question was hit by the judgment rendered in State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Prasad, (2009) 12 SCC 646 then in such circumstances, the Court deemed it appropriate that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice for constitution of a Larger Bench or the bench of higher quorum.
Background
In the present case, the petitioner was married on 23-11-2005, and being an educated and qualified person, in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the respondent, the petitioner submitted her application form in EWS category, for participating in the recruitment process for the posts of Junior Judicial Assistant, Judicial Assistant and Clerk Grade-II in 2020. However, the initial advertisement was withdrawn and on 05-08-2022, fresh advertisement was issued, in which the petitioner stood as an aspiring candidate in the General (Women) Category. On 12-03-2023, the petitioner appeared in the written examination, and meanwhile on 22-03-2023, the petitioner’s husband unfortunately expired while being under treatment at Ahmedabad.
Thereafter, after performing the last rites and rituals of her late husband, the petitioner moved an application on 13-04-2023 before the respondent so that she could be treated in the category of Widow for the purpose of recruitment process in question. However, the petitioner was informed, via telephonic call, that her category could not be changed. Meanwhile, the results were declared for the Phase-I and the cut off marks for General (Women) Category were 196.3451 marks, whereas the cut off marks for General (Widow) Category were 135.0103 marks (for non-TSP area posts). The petitioner secured 147.5228 marks in the Phase-I, which made her successful candidate in General (Widow) Category.
Thus, the petitioner filed the present petition.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court opined that the petitioner was fully eligible candidate and her sole case rested upon the fact that even though the advertisement was issued on 05-08-2022, but the misfortune of widowhood struck her soon after her written examination, as her husband expired on 22-03-2023. The result of the Phase-I examination was not announced and thus, the recruitment was at a very initial stage.
The Court referred to Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 2 SCC 673 and opined that the broad question of law for consideration would be that “Whether candidate(s) can be allowed to change their respective category to a special category subsequent to the initiation of a recruitment process on count of subsequent widowhood, or subsequent disability or any misfortune, which can be caused by force majeure at any stage before final merit is declared, if such candidate(s) are otherwise eligible to participate in the recruitment process under the changed category?”
The Court clarified that such broad question was framed only with regard to participation of person in the recruitment process, who fell under the widow and handicapped categories, because such incidents was an Act of God, and an actual prediction, by any stretch of imagination, could not be within the domain of an individual aspirant or an employer/recruiter. While framing the aforesaid broad question of law, the Court opined that it was conscious of the fact that being a bench of co-equal strength and having an opinion that such categorical relaxation of permitting the petitioner to appear as a widow candidate in the recruitment in question was hit by the judgment rendered in State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Prasad, (2009) 12 SCC 646, then in such circumstances, the Court deemed it appropriate that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice for constitution of a larger Bench or the bench of higher quorum.
The Court further clarified that the selection process and question should remain subject to final outcome of the writ petition and decision of the larger Bench or any bench of higher quorum, so constituted by the Chief Justice.
[Sangeeta Joshi v. High Court of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 507, Order dated 22-02-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Khet Singh Rajpurohit, Advocate;
For the Respondents: Sachin Acharya, Senior Advocate assisted by Chayan Bothra, Advocate
Buy Constitution of India HERE
