- (1.) What is challenged in the instant petition is the legality of the judgment dated 3-1-2011 rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in Ramavatar Pareek v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Civil Writ Petition No. 16920 of 2010, order dated 3-1-2011 (Raj) by which the two main prayers made by the petitioners, namely (7) the entire selection made pursuant to the Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2008 be ordered to be reviewed by summoning the original record or a Committee be appointed to review the Rajasthan Judicial Service Selection process and consequently the Rajasthan Public Service Commission be directed to re-evaluate the answer scripts of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2008 adhering to the moderation formula as suggested by this Court in Sanjay Singh v. U.P. Public Service Commission, 2007 3 SCC 720 and (2) the appointments of the petitioners made to Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2008 on the basis of first final merit list be protected in the light of the decision dated 5-5-2010 of this Court in Rajasthan Public Service Commission v, Balveer Singh Jat, Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2010, order dated 5-5-2010 (SC) and Sanjay Singh v. U.P. Public Service Commission, 2007 3 SCC 720.
(2.) An advertisement was issued by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission whereby applications were invited from the law graduates for the recruitment to the posts of Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate in the cadre of Rajasthan Judicial Service. Pursuant to the said advertisement, the petitioners and other eligible candidates had applied for the post advertised. The written examination for the Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2008 was conducted on 7-2-2009 and 8-2-2009 in accordance with the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 1955. The petitioners along with the other candidates appeared in the written examination and passed the same. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission had adopted a method of scaling for the purpose of assessment of answer sheets. Because of this, some of the candidates who had obtained less raw but whose marks were scaled up were called for interview and subsequently selected and appointed.
(3.) Feeling aggrieved, a series of writ petitions were filed in the High Court of Rajasthan the main petition being DB Civil Writ Petition No. 825 of 2010. The said petition was heard by the Division Bench of the High Court along with other petitions. The Division Bench noticed, Sharwan Kumar v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Civil Writ Petition No. 825 of 2010, order dated 10-5-2010 (Raj) that the Rajasthan Public Service Commission had adopted similar method of scaling for the purpose of assessment of the answer sheets of the candidates who had appeared in Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2005 and because of this, some of the candidates who had obtained less raw but whose marks were scaled up were called for interview and subsequently selected and appointed. It was further noticed that those candidates who had obtained more raw marks than the selected candidates but were not selected had filed series of writ petitions and the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court vide judgment dated 27-10-2009 rendered in Sarita Noushad v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Civil Writ Petition No. 3942 of 2007, order dated 27-10-2009 (Raj) and other cognate writ petitions had, after referring to the decision of this Court in Sanjay Singh v. U.P Public Service Commission, 2007 3 SCC 720, declared the formula of scaling adopted by RPSC as unjust, unreasonable, irrational and arbitrary and granted appropriate reliefs to the petitioners of those writ petition.;