V.S. Kokje, J. - (1.) The appellants, State of Rajasthan and its officers, have come in appeal against the decision of the learned Single Judge [reported in 1999(2) RLR 49] allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent, who has been directed by the learned Single Judge to be appointed in the post for which she was selected but appointment was not being given to her on the ground of pendency of certain cases relating to her marriage with a person who was alleged to have a subsisting earlier marriage.
(2.) The respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court complaining that though she was selected by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission for the post of Lecturer (Collegiate Branch) on 5.4.96 and was placed in the merit list at S1.No. 7, she was not given appointment on the ground that one Ms. Meenakshi Bharti had complained that the respondent had married one Sankalp Shabbir Hasan Quazi, who was husband of the said Ms. Meenakshi Bharti and they had two children from the marriage. Ms. Meenakshi Bharti had also alleged that she had filed a criminal case against the said Sankalp @ Shabbir Hasan Quazi and the respondent Dr. (Mrs.) Nikhat Tasneem for having contracted the marriage during the subsistence of earlier marriage of Sankalp Shabbir Hasan Quazi with her. According to the respondent, she had married in accordance with the Muslim law, with Sankalp @ Shabbir Hasan Quazi who was a Muslim, after duly verifying the dissolution of his earlier marriage by 'Talak' given by him to Ms. Meenakshi Bharti. It was also averred by the respondent in the writ petition that there was no criminal case pending against her and therefore, action of the Government in depriving her of the job for which she was selected, was illegal.
(3.) The State of Rajasthan took the stand that it was well within their right not to appoint a person who has married a person who has a marriage subsisting as it was against the public policy adopted by the State not to employ any person who is party to a plural marriage.;