1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. O R D E R Jas Raj v. State of Raj. & Ors. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.166/1999 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Date of Order : 23rd May, 2005 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Anil Bhandari, for the petitioner. Mr. Shyam Ladrecha, Addl.Govt.Advocate. BY THE COURT : The petitioner is a member of Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service constituted under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Police Subordinate Service) Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1989”). The petitioner is holding the post of Assistant Sub Inspector. The Assistant Sub Inspectors under the Rules of 1989 are having an avenue for promotion to the post of Sub Inspectors, if they are having two years' continuous service as Assistant Sub Inspectors or one year's continuous service as Assistant Sub Inspectors if graduate. 2 For the purpose of promotion a qualifying examination as prescribed under Rule 29 of the Rules of 1989 is required to be qualified by an aspirant. According to Rule 29 of the Rules of 1989 the qualifying examination for promotion includes written, practical, parade and other outdoor tests as Part-I and interview examination of service record including annual confidential report as Part-II of the examination. The Director General of Police is empowered to prescribe syllabus for Part-I examination and general instructions with regard to Part-II examinations. According to Rule 27 of the Rules of 1989 an aspirant for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector is required to secure 45% marks in each part of qualifying examination and 50% aggregate of the total marks of qualifying examination. The respondent department by an order dated 9.10.1998 initiated proceedings for appointment by way of promotion against existing seven vacancies pertaining to the post of Sub Inspector. The petitioner also faced the selection proceedings and he qualified Part-I of examinations, accordingly he was called for to face an interview. However, the petitioner was not selected. 3 Being aggrieved by the same the petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking a direction for respondents to produce result sheet relating to written test, outdoor test and interview held for the post of Sub Inspector. The petitioner has also sought a direction to produce the order by which promotion was denied to him. A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating therein that though the petitioner qualified Part-I and Part-II of the examinations but he failed to secure 50% in aggregate of the total marks and, therefore, he failed to qualify the examination concerned in totality. Under the directions of the Court Shri Mahendra Choudhary, Additional Superintendent of Police, CID, CB, Jodhpur present in Court, produced a result sheet pertaining to the petitioner for the examinations concerned for perusal of the Court. According to the result sheet the petitioner secured marks under various heads as under:- Details of marks obtained by petitioner Jasraj in ASI to SI Promotion Test – 1998-99 Maximum Minimum Marks marks marks obtained Written Test 150 - 73 Parade & Outdoor 100 - 45 _______________________________ Total of Part-I 250 45%=112.5 118 _______________________________ 4 Reward 15 - 0 Punishments 15 - 15 APARs 30 - 22½ Education 10 - 5 Training 10 - - Sports 5 - - Interview 15 - 10 ___________________________________ Total of Part-II 100 45%=45 52½ ___________________________________ Grand Total 350 50%=175 170½ (Part-I + Part-II) Fail From perusal of result sheet it is apparent that the petitioner failed to secure 50% marks in aggregate, therefore, he was not found eligible to be promoted as Sub Inspector. In view of the results of the examinations concerned produced by the respondents, I am satisfied that no illegality occurred while not selecting the petitioner for the purpose of promotion to the post of Sub Inspector. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.