- (1.) PETITIONER , an aspirant for appointment to the post of LDC under the District & Sessions Judge, Merta, has preferred this writ petition praying therein under - mentioned reliefs: A. By an appropriate writ order or direction, the notice dated 10.4.2014 (Annex.3), reject list dated 4.6.2014 (Annex.8) qua the petitioner and any order, direction or communication passed in pursuance to the notice dated 10.4.2014 or in pursuance to the rejected list dated 4.6.2014 may kindly be quashed and set aside. B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to appear in the type and efficiency test in pursuance to the advertisement dated 10.3.2014. C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to conduct a type and efficiency test for the petitioner. D. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of LDC in pursuance of advertisement dated 10.3.2014 with all consequential benefits if otherwise she stands in merit and declared successful in the type and efficiency test. E. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. F. Writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with costs.
(2.) IN the writ petition, it is averred by the petitioner that pursuant to advertisement dated 10th of March 2013, application form was submitted by her with all requisites. Thereafter, the Incharge of Examination issued a notice dated 10th of April 2014 whereby it was conveyed to some applicants who are permitted to appear provisionally to clarify the position about their candidature in the office on or before 31st of May 2014 else candidature of these incumbent shall not be considered. In response to the said notice, petitioner approached the respondent and submitted her proficiency certificate of RSCIT for RKCL's MS Office 2010 practical test and also informed that she has appeared in the theory examination of RSCIT on 28th of May 2014. While divulging these informations, the petitioner made a request to the respondent not to reject her candidature. On receipt of the necessary papers submitted by petitioner, requisite exercise was undertaken by the respondent and it was found that she is lacking basic eligibility, and consequently in the reject list issued by the respondent name of petitioner was also indicated.
(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner appeared in the written examination and was declared successful, therefore, rejection of her candidature is per -se unjust and improper. Learned counsel, Mr. Jangid has also argued that the eligibility conditions prescribed by the respondent in the advertisement are in variance with the advertisement issued by the other District judgeships of the State of Rajasthan, and therefore, rejection of candidature of the petitioner cannot be sustained. Mr. Jangid has also urged that petitioner has qualified the practical examination of RSCIT and she has appeared in the theory examination, therefore, she is eligible to participate in the selection process. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.;