ALOK SHARMA,J. - (1.) The Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (hereinafter 'the RRVPNL'), a State Government Undertaking advertised through Newspaper publication on 2/3-10-2013 for recruitment to 28 posts of Accounts Officers in the five Power Sector companies in Rajasthan-which aside of itself were the Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, (RRVUNL), Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (JVVNL), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (AVVNL) and Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited (JdVVNL). Of the aforesaid 28 posts, 16 posts were for the general category and of which three posts were reserved for female candidates in the general category. This is all admitted and not a matter of dispute.
(2.) The petitioner applied pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement dated 2/3-10-2013 against a post reserved for female candidates in the general category, wrote examination held on 12-1-12014 with Roll No.80401663, and secured 217 marks. The select-list was declared on 5-7-2014. Against the three vacancies in the quota of General Category (Female) Mahima Keshwani (231 marks), Surabhi Pareek (223 marks) and one Monika Sharma (217 marks) were selected. The petitioner despite 217 marks equivalent to Monika Sharma was placed at Serial No.42 immediately below her in the list of General Category (Female) candidate in view of her being younger to Monika Sharma in terms of Regulation 20(1) of the RSEB Officers' Service (Recruitment, Promotion, and Seniority) Regulations, 1974 (hereinafter 'the Regulations of 1974') which provides that in case two or more candidates acquire equal marks, then their date of birth shall be the deciding factor to determine their merit, i.e. the elder candidate shall be placed higher in the merit list. The petitioner was thus not offered appointment against the three vacancies in the quota of General Category (Female). Appointment orders to the selected candidates, including Mahima Keshwani and Monika Sharma were issued for joining on the post of Accounts Officers. However, Mahima Keshwani and Monika Sharma did not join despite their selection.
(3.) The petitioner's case is that she being 4th in the list of successful candidates against the three vacancies in the quota of General Category (Female) should have been offered appointment as Accounts Officer against one of the two vacancies reserved for female candidates in the general category, now available due to non joining of Mahima Keshwani and Monika Sharma. Yet she was not, despite her best efforts including a representation to the Managing Director of the RRVPNL and her counsel's notice for demand of justice dated 9-2-2015 seeking her appointment on the post of Accounts Officer in the facts obtaining. In the circumstances, she approached this Court in SBCWP No.4171/2015, which however on 13-4-2015 was withdrawn by her counsel with liberty to file representation seeking appointment against one of the two vacant posts of Accounts Officer reserved for female candidates in the General Category. Following liberty under the order dated 13-4- 2015 in SBCWP No.4171/2015, the petitioner submitted a representation. That was rejected by the respondent vide order dated 2-5-2015 without disclosing the reasons for her non appointment despite availability of two vacant posts of Accounts Officers for General Category (Female) overlooking the fact that she had secured as many marks as the earlier selected candidate Monika Sharma(217). It has been submitted that during this period the select list was operative for 12 months from the date of its preparation i.e. 5-7-2014/ 6-1-2015, and a fresh advertisement for the next recruitment process for direct recruitment not being issued. It has been submitted that, in the circumstance, the inaction on the part of respondents in not appointing the petitioner to the post of Accounts Officer despite her merit and availability of two vacant posts in General Category (Female) due to non joining of Mahima Keshwani and Monika Sharma, is absolutely arbitrary as also unreasonable and warrants interference by this Court in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction by issuing appropriate directions to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on a vacant post of Accounts Officer in any of its five Power Sector companies as per her merit.;