- (1.) In the writ petitions, common prayer has been made to declare Section 89 of the Rajasthan Panchyati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1994 ), Rules 259(6) and 274 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1996 ) to be ultra vires. It has also been prayed that the advertisement dated 24.2.2012 issued for selection for the post of Teacher Grade III for special category (Visually Impaired) without providing reservation to the candidates of Scheduled Castes Category be declared illegal and quashed. Further prayer has been made in CWP No.6198/2012 that the State be directed to conduct the examination for the post of Teacher Grade III through Rajasthan Public Service Commission (in short, the RPSC ).
(2.) The main grievance projected by the writ petitioners is that earlier under Section 89 the appointment of Teacher Grade III used to be made at State level through the RPSC. Petitioners have cleared the Rajasthan Teacher Eligibility Test. Section 89 of the Act of 1994 provides for constitution of Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad Service. Proviso to Section 89(1) has been deleted w.e.f.15.9.2010 and the amendment has been incorporated in sub-section (2) of Section 89 to include primary and upper primary school teachers. Sections 89(1) and 89(2) now provide that selection shall be made district-wise. Section 90(2) (a) of the Act of 1994 provides that the District Establishment Committee shall make selection of different grades and categories existing in the service in the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad and districts. Provision of Section 90(2)(a) has also been amended w.e.f.15.9.2010 to confer the authority on the District Establishment Committee to make selection for the posts in different grades and categories, except the posts specified in clause (v) of sub-section (2) of Section 89 i.e.Prabodhak and Senior Prabodhak. It is also submitted that Chapter-12 of the Rules of 1996 deals with the recruitment and other service conditions. Rule 258(1)(c)(iv) provides that Primary and Upper Primary School Teachers shall be appointed by concerned District Establishment Committee. The said post has been included in Ministerial and subordinate post in Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad service. Proviso to sub-rule(6) of Rule 259 has been deleted by G.S.R. 61 dated 14.10.2010 w.e.f.19.10.2010. It has also been submitted that Rule 266(3) provides for academic qualification of recruitment as Teacher Grade III (Level-I & Level-II). Rule 270 to Rule 277 deal with 2the procedure for direct recruitment. Rule 273 provides for written test. It also provides that selection for the various posts shall be made in accordance with general directions given by the State Government from time to time in this regard. Rule 274 (1) provides that the committee shall prepare a merit list of candidates found suitable for appointment to each grade or category of posts in the district and on receipt of requisition from the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishads allot candidates from list in the order in which their names occur in the list. Simultaneously under Rule 275, the State has reserved the right to allot the candidates in order of merit from the list of district where there are no vacancies to another district where there may be vacancies for appointment provided that the candidates are not available in the merit list of later district.
(3.) Petitioners have submitted that by making a provision of selection at district level, the examination shall be held on one day in all districts. Thus, the candidate would be able to apply only in one district out of 33 districts in which posts are available. Thus, the provision is arbitrary and discriminatory and the merit is going to be jeopardized; fair opportunity will not be given to those candidates who are meritorious to get selected; right of fair consideration is going to be hampered. Anomalous situation may arise. The provision for making selection through the RPSC and State-wise selection is appropriate which has been illegally amended/deleted. The candidate may have to travel to farther district to give examination which would also create financial difficulty. There should have been only one examination i.e.State level. It has also been submitted that the vacancies varies from district to district. In certain districts, eligible candidates may be less than the number of vacancies advertised. There is bound to happen regional conflicts. There is no restriction with the State to make State-wise selection. The amendment made is violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In CWP No.6198/2012, it has also been submitted that in Jaipur, vacancies have been advertised for visually impaired category. However in the said category, no reservation for Scheduled Caste category has been made. In case State-wise reservation is made, more posts would be available.;