1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.3516/2002. : : Smt.Geeta Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 2.12.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.Shantanu Bansal for the petitioner. Mr.Aklesh Jain, Dy.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed challenging the final selection list dated 20.5.2002 (Annexure-4) whereby the respondent No.4 Smt. Hemlata Pal was selected for appointment as Shiksha Sahayogi of village Musalpur. Shri Shantanu Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that name of the petitioner appeared at Serial No.1 in the originally prepared list, but her name was ignored with a view to extending favour to respondent No.4, who was otherwise at Serial No.2 in the select list. The select list should therefore be quashed and set aside so far it has shown respondent No.4 at Serial No.1 therein. It was argued that no notice was given to the petitioner before rejecting 2 her candidature for appointment on the post of Shiksha Sahayogi thus violating Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. Shri Aklesh Jain, learned Deputy Government Counsel opposed the writ petition and submitted that the petitioner in fact applied for appointment as Shiksha Sahayogi in at least 14 different gram panchayats including Gram Panchayat, Aligarh, but she did not make any application for village Musalpur in Gram Panchayat Tontri. Her application was registered in the Office of Block Elementary Education Officer, Bari and her application for Gram Panchayat, Aligarh was registered at Serial No.711. No entry was made that any application was made by the petitioner for appointment in village Musalpur of Gram Panchayat Tontri. Subsequently, the petitioner realised that her name was within merit for any of the villages and that as per merit, her name appears at Serial No.4 of Gram Panchayat, Aligarh. The petitioner in connivance with the staff of Gram Panchayat got the manipulation made in the application form and this is how her name was shown at Serial No.1 in the select list. It was submitted that respondent No.4 Smt. Hemlata made a complaint to the District Grievance Committee and on this complaint, the 3 District Collector himself scrutinized her form and found substance in her application that petitioner originally did not apply for appointment as Shiksha Sahayogi in village Musalpur, Gram Panchayat Tontri. In view of the stand taken by the respondent, satisfaction arrived at by the District Collector, followed by an enquiry, this Court cannot possibly substitute their version, that in the originally submitted application the respondents have found that out of 14 applications in different 14 Gram Panchayats no application was submitted by the petitioner for village Musalpur, Gram Panchayat, Tontri. It was the application submitted for Gram Panchayat Aligarh which was registered at Serial No.711 and which was ultimately changed to Gram Panchayat Tontri by striking out Gram Panchayat Aligarh for appointment as Shiksh Sahayogi in village Musalpur, Gram Panchayat Tontri. In view of above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.41.