AJAY RASTOGI,J. - (1.) These batch of writ petitions have been referred by the ld.Single Judge on account of two conflicting views to be examined by the Division Bench of this Court "Whether a delay of two years in the physical/efficiency test following the written examination during which a woman candidate became pregnant would entitle to seek postponement of the date of her physical efficiency examination or such date cannot be postponed to the detriment and rejection of the woman candidate."
(2.) It reveals from the order passed by the ld.Single Judge dated 20.02.2017 that there are two conflicting judgments of the coordinate Single Bench of this Court on the issue under consideration while in the case of Soniya Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Another [S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.2537/2016] decided on 29.02.2016 it has been held that time of conducting Physical Efficiency Test/Physical Standard Test be extended in giving her reasonable time of relaxation which could make her possible to participate in the physical/efficiency test in the process of evaluating her merit for appointment on the post of Constable. However, prior thereto a contrary view was expressed by the coordinate Single Bench at the Principal Seat at Jodhpur in Suwa Panwar v. The State of Rajasthan and Others [S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.6122/2011] decided on 23.08.2011 where it has been held that maternity is indeed a human right of a woman, having qualified written test for the post of Constable, the candidate being aware of the need to undergo physical efficiency test ought to have scheduled her pregnancy accordingly so that she could participate in the physical/efficiency test in the process of evaluating her merit for appointment on the post of Constable.
(3.) In examining the question raised for our consideration, we take note of the facts for proper appraisal of the matter with the consent of the parties from Writ Petition No.18808/2015.;