MANMOHAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-12
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: RAJASTHAN)
Decided on April 01,2014

MANMOHAN SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RAJASTHAN IN DEEPAK KUMAR SUTHAR V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
MADANLAL VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH CHAND SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
GIRDHAR KUMAR DADHICH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

MALOOK SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-2021-9-161] [REFERRED TO]
LALIT KUMAR PARASAR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-3-251] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

T.S.THAKUR, J. - (1.)DELAY condoned.
(2.)LEAVE granted.
The fate of these appeals by special leave, turn on a true and correct understanding of an order passed by this Court in Kailash Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (2002) 6 SCC 562. This Court was, in that case examining whether award of bonus marks to candidates seeking appointment as primary school teachers under Zila Parishads in the State of Rajasthan based on the domicile of the candidates was legally permissible. A similar question was earlier examined and answered in the negative by a Full Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan in Deepak Kumar Suthar v. State of Rajasthan (1999) 2 Raj LR 692 [W.P. (C) No.1917 of 1995], which arose out of selection of Grade II and III teachers borne in the State cadre under the administrative control of the State Government. The High Court had in Deepak Kumar 's case (supra) held that although award of bonus marks was not constitutionally valid, no relief could be given to the writ -petitioners in that case as they did not stand a chance even if award of bonus marks to the successful candidate was disregarded and inter se merit of the candidates determined without taking such marks into consideration. The operative portion of the order passed in Deepak Kumar 's case (supra) is as under:

''Instead of sending the matter to the appropriate Bench, we think it proper to dispose of this petition with a direction that no relief can be granted to the petitioners as they could not succeed to get the place in the merit list even by getting 10 bonus marks being residents of urban area, for which they are not certainly entitled. More so, the petitioners have not impleaded any person from the select list, not even the last selected candidate. Thus, no relief can be granted to them in spite of the fact that the appointments made in conformity with the impugned circular have not been in consonance with law. However, we clarify that any appointment made earlier shall not be affected by this judgment and it would have prospective application. ''

(3.)WHEN selection process for filling up posts of primary school teachers in six different districts in the State of Rajasthan commenced in the year 1998 -99, award of bonus marks based on the domicile of the candidates once again came under challenge before the High Court. The immediate provocation for the challenge was provided by a Circular dated 10th June, 1998 issued by the Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj which prescribed the procedure to be followed for making selections and appointments against the available vacancies including the method for determination of merit based on educational qualifications of the candidates and award of bonus marks depending upon whether the candidates were domiciled in Rajasthan and residents of an urban or rural area of the State. The circular said: ''This year, determination of merit has been amended and determination of merit will be done as follows: I. Marks for educational qualification JUDGEMENT_246_TLPRE0_20141.htm JUDGEMENT_246_TLPRE0_2014.htm


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.