- (1.) THESE writ petitions pertain to selection to various posts conducted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short 'the RPSC').
(2.) ADVERTISEMENT for the post of Lecturer (Hindi) in College Education Department was issued on 21.9.2010 and for the post of Medical Officer (Dentistry) and Medical Officer (Homoeopathy) on 8.3.2011. All the petitioners along with others appeared in the selection. The controversy raised in these writ petitions pertains to the question papers set by the Commission as majority of questions are taken from book/ guide book/ reference book and are verbatim the same. In the present matter, if a candidate prepared himself for selection by reading one book only from where majority of the questions set out then he will remain successful, hence selection aforesaid cannot be said to be fair and proper because it remains to the benefit of those who had referred one book only leaving others. It is urged that competitive examination should be conducted in the manner where question papers are set by the RPSC without copying it from any book or guide. Accordingly, a challenge to the selection to various posts of Lecturer, Medical Officer (Dentistry) and (Homoeopathy) has been made. The posts involved in these writ petitions are different thus brief facts of each writ petition/s are given herein for ready reference. CW No. 8786/2011, 9206/2011, 9225/2011, and 9223/2011 Lecturer (Hindi), College Education Department - Aforesaid writ petitions pertain to the post of Lecturer (Hindi), College Education. The allegation is that out of 100 questions, 52 questions were from one book only namely; "1000 Hindi Sahitya Prashnottari, author Kumud Sharma, published by Prabhat Prakashan". It is submitted that the Commission had earlier cancelled selection for the post of Teacher Gr II (Urdu) where majority of the questions were taken from one guide book thus similar treatment should have been given to the present selection. CW No. 9582/2011, Medical Officer (Dentistry) - This writ petition pertains to appointment to the post of Medical Officer (Dentistry) where allegation is that out of total questions, 84 questions were taken from "Dental Pulse, publisher Swapna Medical Publishers". Petitioners have given comparative statement to indicate as to from which pages of the aforesaid book, questions have been taken. CW No.8829/2011 Medical Officer (Homoeopathy)- This matter pertains to appointment to the post of Medical Officer (Homoeopathy) for which 43 posts have been advertised. The allegation therein is in regard to 59 questions taken from a particular guide "UPSC and MD Entrance Examination (Homoeopathy) Second Edition by Dr VK Chauhan, MD (Hom) published by B Jain Publishers (P) Ltd" and answers of the questions are in the same sequence as are given in the aforesaid guide book.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioners submit that the way selection to the post referred to above has been conducted by the Commission cannot depose confidence as taking majority questions and answers from one and same book is nothing but stereo type working of the paper setter whereas the paper setting is assigned by Commission with instructions to the paper setter not to copy the questions or answers from any guide/reference book but to prepare it at his own. This is to get only meritorious candidates and not a candidate who may have prepared himself by one guide books and fortunately for him, majority of the questions were taken from it making his task to be easy to get selected not on the basis of his merit but due to luck. The responsibility of the Commission is not only to make selection by luck but it should be purely on merit. In the similar circumstances, when an issue was raised to the Commission in regard to selection to the post of Teacher Gr II (Urdu) pursuant to the advertisement of the year 2008, finding majority of the questions from one and same guide book, selection was cancelled thus similar view should have been taken by the Commission in the present matters also but in a discriminatory manner, they have failed to give similar treatment to the selection in dispute hence their action becomes illegal being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Thus, while setting aside the selection for the aforesaid posts, respondents may be directed to conduct competitive examination afresh with a further direction that while setting out questions, paper setter should not be guided by any guide/ reference books. Learned counsel for the Commission and the State Mr SN Kumawat contested the matter. It is stated that allegations made by the petitioners for setting out majority of the questions from one guide or reference book are not correct. The Commission conducts selection with utmost caution and fairness. For the post of Lecturer (Hindi), College Education, certain complaints were received regarding questions and answers, accordingly, a committee was constituted by the Commission. The committee recommended to ignore 19 questions. Accordingly, marks were awarded ignoring 19 questions therein. The book ""1000 Hindi Sahitya Prashnottari, author Kumud Sharma, published by Prabhat Prakashan" contains many questions but writer/author thereof has not been authorised by the Commission, rather, the guide book is not for selection of RPSC but is a guide book read by the candidates in general for all competitive examinations. It may be a co-incidence that certain questions may match from the aforesaid guide book but if the comparative statement is looked into, then similar questions exist in other reference/ guide books also. A subject cannot have indefinite number of questions thus whatever probable questions can be framed, such exercise is taken by all the writers/ authors. The questions alleged to have been taken from above guide book are available in other guide/ reference books also. Thereby, allegation made by the petitioners is not correct and, otherwise, it does not affect merit of the selection because the time given to sort out the answers is quite limited and can be done only by a candidate having proper knowledge and merit in him. If the case of petitioners is taken, then out of alleged similar questions, majority were attempted by them also and if they have merit in them, there is no reason not to get merit position. The writ petitions have been filed knowing it well that petitioners have not done well in the selection. Thus to overcome from their default and unsuccessfulness, these writ petitions have been filed. This is more so when majority of the questions for which dispute has been raised were correctly answered by few petitioners, details of which have been given in the additional affidavit filed in CW No.8786/2011 Rewant Dan vs RPSC and ors. Learned Additional Advocate General has further given reference to other posts namely Medical Officer, Dentistry and Medical Officer, Homoeopathy. ;