SHARMA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE appellant filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge with the prayer that the action of the respondents depriving the appellant from giving the appointment on the post of sub-Inspector (Police) be held illegal and unreasonable and direction was sought in the name of the respondents to appoint the appellant on the post of Sub-Inspector Police with all consequential benefits. Learned Single Judge, however did not agree with the appellant and vide order dated April 10, 2002 dismissed the writ petition. Against this order of the learned Single Judge that the present action for filing the instant special appeal has been resorted to by the appellant. Contextual facts depict that the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short `rpsc') issued an advertisement dated January 23, 1996 for Joint Entrance Examination for the post of Sub-Inspector Police under Rajasthan Police Sub-Ordinate Service Rules, 1989 (for short the 1989 Rules ). Pursuant to said advertisement, the appellant applied and he was called for the written examination and interview. The appellant was declared successful and his name found place in the merit list at Serial No. 223 (SC ). The Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur, (for short DGP) thereafter asked the appellant to appear in medical test on August 12, 1997 vide letter dated August 6, 1997. However, in the list of successful candidates issued on October 20, 1997 name of appellant was not included. On making inquiry the appellant came to know that his candidature for appointment was not considered because F. I. R. No. 10/93, was registered against him at Police Station Kapasan, district Chittorgarh on October 7, 1993 under Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation of distribution of pamphlets provoking the persons of SC/st against Thakurji at Gram Ramthalki wherein the members of SC/st were not allowed to enter. The appellant submitted representation for giving him the appointment on the ground that final report given in the case was accepted by the Court of Magistrate vide order dated March 11, 1998. When no action was taken by DGP, the appellant filed writ petition before the learned Single Judge. Respondents contested the writ petition by filing the reply wherein it was stated that since the representation of the appellant was pending, no relief could be granted to the appellant.
(3.) HAVING scanned the material on record, we notice that the learned Single Judge after hearing the rival submissions posted the case for dictation of orders. It also appears that during the pendency of the writ petition before the learned Single Judge, respondents placed on record the letter dated January 29, 2002 of DGP addressed to the Additional Superintendent of Police, C. I. D. (Dowry Cell), Rajasthan, Jaipur, wherein it was stated that the appellant was not given appointment since he was not found fit for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police. In view of said letter learned Single Judge, while observing that fresh cause of action arose to the appellant, dismissed the writ petition. During the pendency of instant special appeal, on July 22, 2005 the respondents were directed to file affidavit of responsible officer to show as to whether there was any other reason for not appointing the appellant but for what has been mentioned in paragraphs 12 to 14 of the writ petition. It appears from the order sheet that compliance of the said order has not been made. Thereafter on July 10, 2007 the respondents were directed to produce the record file of the appellant but it appears that the record was also not produced for the reasons best known to the respondents. On analyzing the submissions advanced before us, we find that the appellant, although has qualified written examination conducted in view of 1989 Rules, he was declined appointment on the ground that F. I. R. under Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code was lodged against him and his family members at Police Station Kapasan, district Chittorgarh on October 7, 1993. Indisputably, the State Government did not accord sanction and final report was filed, which was accepted by the Court of Magistrate on November 2, 1998. ;