1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3685/2007 Hari Ram Nodal versus State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 18th March, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. G.R.Punia, for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Ladrecha] Mr. Tarun Joshi ] for the respondents. .... By an notification dated 31.10.2005, process of selection was initiated for appointment to the post of Senior Scientific Assistant (Chemistry Division). On the selection of the respondent No.3, this petition for writ is preferred to reject her candidature being suffered with disablement in the lower limbs. The allegations of the petitioner against the respondent No.3 are “that the respondent No.3 Miss Geeta Wadhwani was selected for the post of Senior Scientific Assistant (Chemistry), a handicapped by both the lower limbs, who cannot even walk at her own and has to remain on wheelchair. The information bulletin and important instructions to the applicants supplied to the petitioner along with the application form by the respondent RPSC indicate that the work of post advertised includes scientific tests in laboratory and outer duties. The bulletin also provides that every candidate should be physically and mentally fit”; and “that it was incumbent upon 2 the respondent Secretary, RPSC to supply the information much less the address of respondent Miss Geeta Wadhwani and the reasons for placing her in the merit list despite the fact that she does not fulfill the fitness criteria of physical and mental fitness.” In reply to the writ petition the facts regarding disability as alleged are denied with an assertion that the respondent No.3 is sufficiently physically and mentally able to discharge the duties relating to the post of Senior Scientific Assistant (Chemistry Division). The academic qualification of the respondent No.3 as given in reply to the writ petition filed on her behalf is as follows:- “In this connection, answering respondent respectfully submits that she passed her B.Sc. examination with 1st Division in the year 1999. Thereafter, M.Sc. (Chemistry) examinations were also passed by her in the year 2001 with 1st Division. It is pertinent to mention here that answering respondent stand at Merit No.3 in the college concerned. Thereafter, she cleared her NET-JRF examinations from CSIR, Delhi in the year 2003. She completed her Ph.D. in the year 2007, for which, she enrolled under Dr. I.K.Sharma, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur in the year 2004, herewith and collectively marked as Annexure-R/3/7. Answering respondent also attended National Symposium on “Sciences and Technology for Desert Development”, held at Jaipur from 2-4 December 2004 and National Symposium on “Recent Advances in 3 Chemical Research”, held at Jaipur from 28-29 March 2005. Answering respondent No.3 has also attended National conference on “Electrodics and Electrode Kinetic”, held at Jiwaji University School of Studies in Chemistry University, Gwalior from 25-27 November 2005. She also attended International Symposium on “Advances in Electrochemical Science and Technology (ISAEST-8) from Cecri Campus Karaikudi conducted at National Institute of Oceanography, Goa from 28-29 November 2006. She also attended National Seminar on “Chemical Aspects of Environmental Challenges and their Management (CAECM-07) U.G.C. Sponsored Agarwal P.G. College, Jaipur from 27-28 February 2007. The copies of the certificates issued by the organisors of the aforesaid events are submitted herewith and collectively marked as Annexure-R/3/8. That being the position, it is clear that the appointment of the answering respondent on the post in question cannot be said to be an outcome of illegal or arbitrary exercise. The answering respondent is possessing all the requisites for the purpose of getting appointment on the post in question. She is physically and mentally fit to discharge the duties assigned to the post in question. Not only that, but the R.T.O. Office has also issued driving licence to the answering respondent after undergoing the requisite tests meant therefor which is in force for the period 22-8-1996 to 21-8-2016, a copy whereof is submitted herewith and marked as Annexure-R/3/9.” Alongwith reply to the writ petition, the 4 respondent No.3 has also placed on record certain photographs, perusal wherefrom it is abundantly clear that she is adequately physically and mentally fit. The Commission in its reply also denied the allegations made by the petitioner. It is pertinent to note here that the petitioner has levelled reckless allegations against the respondent No.3 even without knowing her address. It is nowhere stated by the petitioner in entire petition for writ that as to how he came to know about the alleged disability of the respondent No.3. Such kind of reckless allegations requires deprecation by this Court. The respondent No.3 may be suffering from some disability but for making an allegation that she is not physically and mentally fit or she is to move with wheelchair only, the petitioner should have inquired true facts adequately. No one can be permitted to make ill-founded allegations against any person. The petitioner on basis of absolutely ill-founded and reckless allegations called upon the respondent No.3 before this Court and for that not only his conduct deserves to be condemned but he is also liable to pay adequate cost to the respondent No.3. For the reasons mentioned above, this petition for writ is dismissed with a cost of Rs.6000/- that is required to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent No.3 on or before 1st July, 2008. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. 5 Kkm/ps.