- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to consider his case for appointment on the post of Compounder/Nurse (Ayurved) (Jr. Grade) under the category of handicapped quota and provide appointment upon above post with all consequential benefits from the date when less meritorious persons were provided appointment.
(2.) ADMITTEDLY the petitioner is claiming appointment on the ground that one Ashok Kumar belonging to handicapped category and applied under the Scheduled Caste category has been provided appointment and case of the petitioner has been ignored, therefore, appointment given to Ashok Kumar under quota of handicapped category may be declared illegal. As per the petitioner, candidate Ashok Kumar should not have been given appointment as he is less meritorious candidate than the petitioner. The petitioner has specifically mentioned in the writ petition that he belongs to OBC category and secured 75.48 marks, therefore, he is entitled to be considered for appointment on the post of Compounder/Nurse (Ayurved) (Grade II) in the Ayurved Department against the quota of Physically Handicapped. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that appointment has been denied to him on illegal grounds and candidate having lesser percentage of marks has been provided appointment. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there were 9 vacancies out of which 7 vacancies have been filled in, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for appointment under the handicapped quota. In view of above, it is submitted that the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as per his merit in the OBC category.
(3.) PER contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Rajasthan Public Service Commission vehemently submits that petitioner cannot claim his right at par with candidate Ashok Kumar because his case is considered under the Scheduled Caste category, therefore, he cannot claim his right at par with different category. Therefore, there is complete fallacy in the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that his case is illegally ignored.;