Vineet Kothari, J. - (1.) Heard the learned counsels.
(2.) The petitioners 17 in number, who belong to OBC category in these two writ petitions, are claiming appointment on the post of 'Prabodhak' under the Rules of 2008. The learned counsel for the petitioner urged that even though clear vacancies in OBC category with DEEO, Pali exist, as per the reply filed by the respondents themselves in the writ petition, the learned DEEO, Pali has failed to give appointment to those of the petitioners who stand in the merit and therefore, deserve to be appointed as Prabohak.
(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents Mr. R.L. Jangid, assisted by Mr. Rajesh Bhati has produced a chart before this Court showing the position of vacancies of Prabodhak under the Rules of 2008 with the DEEO, Pali which shows vide item No.7 of the said chart produced before the Court today that 2 vacancies for the 'male' and 11 vacancies for female category totalling 13 vacancies in OBC category exist as on today with DEEO, Pali. The learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that out of the petitioners aforesaid 17 in numbers those who come in merit, 13 of such persons can be adjusted and appointed against these vacancies. He further submitted that if female candidates are not available in sufficient number, then male candidates can be appointed against such 11 vacancies shown in the category of female candidates. For this purpose, the learned counsels brought to the notice of this Court Rule 9 of Rules of 2008 which clearly stipulates that in the event of non-availability of eligible and suitable women candidates, the vacancies so reserved for them shall be filled up by male candidates and such vacancies shall not be carried forward to the subsequent years.;