Veerendra Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) THE petitioners having unsuccessfully participated in the selection process for appointment to the post of Teacher Grade -III, in response to advertisement (Annexure -1), issued in the year 2004; have approached this Court praying for the following relief(s): - (i) the respondents may kindly be directed to observe transparency and to demarket vacancies categorywise and the back log vacancies available to the scheduled caste may kindly be directed to be fulfilled on priority basis before fulfilling the current vacancies and no appointment orders be issued in pursuance of the merit list to any candidate unless the vacancies of back log belonging to the scheduled caste are fulfilled. (ii) any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.
(2.) THE skeletal facts, indispensable for appreciation of the controversy are: that the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent -Commission'), invited applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Primary Teacher Grade -III, to fill up the backlog of reserved category (SC/ST). It is further pleaded that the reservation provided for Scheduled Tribe is 12% and for Scheduled Caste is 16%, but vacancies of Scheduled Caste have not been determined to the extent of the percentage of reservation. According to the self -assessment of the petitioners, they are confident of having secured higher merit than the successful candidates and therefore, their names ought to have been included in the list of successful candidates published by the respondent -Commission. The Scheduled Caste Unemployed Teachers Association also represented the matter to the then Hon'ble Education Minister. The representation evoked no response and therefore, instituted the instant writ proceedings, assailing the action of the respondent -Commission for non -inclusion of their names in the merit list; being violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the pleaded facts insistingly argued that the petitioners have been deprived of their fundamental rights guaranteed by Part -III of the Constitution. In spite of having higher marks than the last selected candidate, they have been deprived of their fundamental right of equality and equal opportunity in the matter of appointment to public service.
(3.) IN response to the notice of the writ application, the State -respondents as well as respondent -Commission, have filed their counter -affidavits/replies, stating that recruitment process for appointment to the post of Teacher Grade -III in Primary and Upper Primary Schools, was carried out under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. The total 153417 application forms received in response to the advertisement, were scrutinized and a written test was conducted on 12th September, 2004, followed by declaration and publication of the priority/merit list of the successful candidates on 11th February, 2005, wherein the names of the petitioners did not find place owing to the fact that the petitioners secured less marks, than the last candidate selected in the SC (Male/WE) category. Marks secured by the petitioners at the examination have been detailed out in the counter -affidavit by the respondent -Commission, which reads thus: - ;