- (1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition claiming the following reliefs: "I. That the writ petition preferred by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with all consequential benefits. II. That the impugned order dated 09.07.2014 (Annex.9) may kindly be quashed and set aside up to the extent of rejection of candidature of the petitioner. III. That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Safaikaramchari (Sweeper) against the statutory quota of 30% reservation for women candidates out of the total vacancies available with the respondent Municipal Board Sagwada. IV. It is further prayed that if during pendency of the writ petition any other person is appointed and allowed to join the duties in place of the posts reserved for female candidate, then their appointment may be quashed and the petitioner may be allowed to join the duties. V. That the petitioner may be held entitled and eligible to consider for appointment against 30% quota of reservation for women candidate with arrears of salary, continuity of service and all other consequential benefits."
(2.) This Court passed the following orders for the same petitioner regarding the same dispute in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14744/2013 Smt. Rekha & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. decided on 23.05.2014. "Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the parties submits that in identical writ petition, final order has already been passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.82/2014 (Smt. Naina Devi Vs. State of Raj.) decided on 05.05.2014 in which directions are given to the respondents to consider all the requisite qualifications and experience mentioned in the advertisement afresh and consider the case of the petitioner for providing appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari, therefore, this writ petition may also be disposed of in the light of aforesaid judgment. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of Smt. Naina Devi's case (supra)."
(3.) The aforesaid order followed a coordinate Bench judgment of this Court of Smt. Naina Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.82/2014) decided on 05.05.2014, which reads as under: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In this writ petition, petitioner is claiming appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari in pursuance of advertisement 1/2012 Annex.1 on the ground that respondents are not providing benefit of women reservation, whereas as per the rules there is provision for reservation of women candidates for appointment in question. In the reply filed by the respondents, it is specifically pleaded that petitioner is not possessing eligibility criteria more specifically experience so as to make her eligible for the post of Safaikaramchari. In the reply there is no denial with regard to reservation for the women candidate, the ground for denial of appointment is that petitioner is not possessing requisite qualification for the post in question provided in the advertisement, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that every candidate, if possessing qualification published in the advertise then his/ her case is to be considered in accordance with law. In advertisement Annex. 1 the following qualification was published for appointment on the post of Safaikaramchari, which reads as under :- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... In view of above facts on qualification, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents that if petitioner is possessing all requisite qualification and experience mentioned in the advertisement 1/2012 Annex.1 and furnish all the certificate before last date fixed for filling application form then her case be considered in accordance with law for providing appointment on the post of Safaikaramchari within one month from the date of receiving certified copy of this order." ;