- (1.) THIS special appeal is directed against judgment dated 27.10.2009 of learned Single Judge by which writ petition filed by appellants has been dismissed. Appellants filed writ petition challenging select list dated 18.02.2009 prepared by respondents for appointment to the post of Rural Health Worker (Female), pursuant to advertisement dated 18.07.2008. Said selection was to be made under provisions of Rajasthan Rural Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 2008.
(2.) CONTENTION that has been raised in appeal is that learned Single Judge erred in law in dismissing writ petition only because identical writ petition was dismissed by a coordinate bench of this Court at Jodhpur. Learned Single Judge did not consider and appreciate the law enunciated by Supreme Court in Krishan Yadav and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors. : (1994) 4 SCC 165, wherein action of the State not granting appointment to certain candidates whose performance in written test and interview, was held to be arbitrary. It is contended that performance of appellants in written test and interview was excellent but they were not granted appointment whereas several other candidates having lesser marks were given appointment. It is submitted that writ petition could not have been dismissed only because appellants participated in process of selection without challenging the same earlier. There was no occasion for them to challenge the same earlier and they could challenge the same only when it was made known to them that they have been declared unsuccessful. We have gone through judgment of learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge has dismissed writ petition adopting reasonings given by coordinate bench of this Court at Jodhpur in its judgment dated 23.10.2009 in Writ Petition No. 1757/2009 Smt. Yashbala Rathore v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. connected writ petitions, holding that controversy raised in present matter is squarely covered by aforesaid judgment dated 23.10.2009.
(3.) JUDGMENT of Supreme Court in Krishan Yadav (supra), on which reliance was placed before learned Single Judge, arose out of a case in which there were allegations that selection was vitiated by fraud, nepotism, favouritism and arbitrariness, and those with better performance in written test and interview, were not selected. C.B.I. enquiry was ordered in the matter, which reported that entire selection was vitiated by fraud, and, accepting that report, the entire selection was cancelled. There was neither such material placed before learned Single Judge nor before us in this appeal. The judgment of that extreme proposition of law cannot have any application to the facts of present case.;