CW 8330/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.8330/2007 Shiv Lehri Sharma Versus State & Ors. Date of Order ::: 03/12/2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Sandeep Bhagati, for petitioner Mr. SN Kumawat, Addl. Adv. Gen for respondents-State & RPSC Instant petition has been filed by petitioner with the grievance that despite being finally selected and placed at S.No.18 in reserved select list, benefit of past services rendered by him while holding post of Teacher Gr.II has not been granted by respondents while being considered for appointment to the post of Lecturer (School Education). Posts of Lecturer (School Education) (Hindi alongwith other subjects) were advertised vide notification No.3/2004-05 dt. 18/08/2004 (Ann.1), pursuant to which petitioner being eligible also submitted application; however, looking to large number of candidates having applied for, screening test was held by respondent-PSC, in which petitioner appeared and was declared successful and called for interview. However, in final select list prepared by respondents, name of petitioner finds place at S.No.18 in reserved select list for general (male) CW 8330/07 //2// category. Grievance of petitioner is that he was holding the post of Teacher Gr.III pursuant to his regular selection and rendered 14 years of service at the time when he participated in process of selection initiated by respondents for the post of Lecturer (School Education), teaching experience to his credit was not taken taken note of by respondents while being called for interview to participate in process of selection pursuant to advertisement impugned herein. That apart, it has been further alleged that respondent-PSC nominated respondent-3 (Vinod Behari Sharma) as member of interview Board which consisted only of two members instead of 3 members as required and applicants appearing from Dausa were selected since respondent-3 belongs to Dausa district. His grievance is that procedure adopted by respondents cannot be held to be fair in holding the selection impugned. In the reply filed by respondent-PSC, what has been averred in regard to the constitution of the committee and allegations levelled in case of respondent-3 as member, have completely been denied. However, it has been averred that petitioner, himself, belongs to Dausa who has been selected and his name CW 8330/07 //3// finds place in reserved select list and such allegations imputed by him in the facts of instant case are wholly uncalled for. At the same time. It has also been averred that petitioner's name finds place in reserved select list. As regards constitution of the Committee, according to answering respondent, it also depends upon the decision of the Commission constituting the interview Board – in absence of constitution of the Board being in violation of any statute, is not required to be interfered with. As regards claim of benefit of service experience rendered by petitioner, Counsel for respondents submits that there is no such provision under the Rules and the posts of Lecturer (School Education) being filled up through open selection, all those holding post of Teacher Gr.III, if applied for, are to be considered as per the procedure provided for open selection under the Rules, 1970. This Court has considered rival contentions of the Counsel for the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. Submission made on behalf of the petitioner in regard to benefit of teaching experience gained by him, is of no substance for the reason that there is no such provision under service Rules which may grants any CW 8330/07 //4// benefit of teaching experience while being considered for the post of Lecturer (School Education) pursuant to advertisement impugned through open selection. However, while candidature being adjudged, it would be open for the Committee to take note of it. As regards instant case, petitioner's name finds place in the reserved list and this might be on the basis of taking note of his experience of the post of Teacher Gr.III which he held. Allegations imputed against member of the Committee are wholly baseless. The petitioner, as alleged, himself belongs to Dausa district and has been selected. That apart, there is no documentary evidence on record by which this Court can infer in regard to irresponsible allegations impugned by petitioner. It is not his case that reserved list at any stage was called upon and any person lower in merit at a later stage has been considered for appointment against vacancies advertised impugned herein. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.4/ 8330CW07RsrDec3.doc