LODHA, J. - (1.) THE unsuccessful petitioner is in appeal. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer the appellant, `the petitioner' here-in-after. THE petitioner claims to have secured second class marks at the level of post graduation. She is also B. Ed. She is working on the post of Teacher Grade III and is said to have completed 15 years service as Teacher Grade III.
(2.) RAJASTHAN Public Service Commission (for short `the Commission') issued an advertisement (3/2004-05) dated 18-8-2004 calling for applications for the post of Teachers Grade I in different subjects. Particularly, for the post of Teacher Grade I (Hindi), total 309 posts were advertised out of which 112 posts were kept for general caste male candidates and 47 posts were reserved for female general caste candidates. For a total 309 posts of Teacher Grade I (Hindi), more than 15000 applications we received. The written examination, accordingly, was conducted by the Commission in which about 15000 students are said to have appeared. The petitioner was declared qualified in the written examination. She was called for the interview. The results were declared. The petitioner's name appeared at position No. 9 in the reserved list for female candidates. Upset thereby, she approached this court by filing the writ petition. The petitioner prayed that the Commission and the State Government be directed to prepare a fresh merit list after taking into consideration the marks obtained by the candidates in the written examination and based on that merit list, the appointment orders be issued. The Commission contested the writ petition and filed its reply. They justified the holding of written examination which was according to them `screening test' to sort out the candidates for the purpose of interview. They justified the process of selection and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. The Single Judge by his order dated 16-3-2007 dismissed the writ petition. Mr. Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, the counsel for the petitioner, principally, focused on two issues before us. First, his submission was that written examination having been held by the Commission, the marks obtained therein could not have been ignored and the selection could not have been made on the basis of the interview marks alone. According to him, it was incumbent upon the Commission to give weightage to the marks obtained in the written examination. His second submission before us was that even if it be assumed that the merit of the candidates could have been evaluated on the basis of the marks obtained in interview, the process of interview suffers from legal flaw as there was no criteria laid down by the Commission for award of marks in the interview test.
(3.) MR. S. N. Kumawat, the counsel for the Commission supported the order of the Single Judge. In the advertisement issued by the Commission as shown by Mr. S. N. Kumawat, it has been stated thus: *** Strangely, the petitioner has only placed on record some information notice called and not the copy of the advertisement. In the advertisement, it has been made clear to all the candidates that in the event of large number of applications, the Commission, if it considers to do so, shall hold the written examination by way of screening test and call for interview only those examines who possess the marks in the screening test prescribed by the Commission. ;