CW-3033/1996 -Prem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment dt.23.10.08 1/3 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3033/1996 Prem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : 23rd October, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit for the petitioner. Mr. Alkesh Agrawal, Dy. Government Counsel, for the respondents. --------- 1. Heard learned counsels. 2. Learned counsel submits that recently this Court while deciding the similar controversy in the case of Rata Ram Sharma Vs. Zila Parishad & Ors. - S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3877/1995 decided on 17.4.2008, has held that private respondents already appointed could not be removed from service on account of claim of the petitioner that he stood higher in the merit and, therefore, he was required to be appointed against the post available at the time of filing of the writ petition. 3. This Court while dealing with these two judgments of this Court in Case of Ghewar Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. namely S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3450/1994 decided on 31st January, 1995 and Smt. Aruna Puri & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. namely S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1249/1995 decided on 11th July, 1995 held as under:- “It is to be noticed that in Ghewar Ram's case the CW-3033/1996 -Prem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment dt.23.10.08 2/3 reservation of the posts in favour of the female candidates without making any provision in the Rules governing the recruitment was under challenge. This Court after due consideration found that no reservation in favour of the females candidates and other candidates could be made by mere executive instructions without amending the Rules governing the recruitment to the concerned service. Accordingly, all reservation against the Rules incorporated in the advertisement concerned in that case were quashed and the respondents were directed to continue the process of selection without applying the provision for reservation in the advertisement which were against the Rules. However, in the matter of Aruna Puri's case (supra), it has been clarified by this Court that the directions issued shall be applicable only to the selection process which were not complete. Suffice is to say that the vested right of the persons selected and appointed has not been interfered with. It is to be noticed that in pursuance of the advertisement in question the selection process has already been completed long back and the persons selected have been accorded appointment. This Court cannot issue direction to the respondents to accord appointment beyond the vacancies advertised. As a matter of fact this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners after completion of the selection process in question, therefore, in view of the decision of this Court in Aruna Puri's case (supra) no relief can be granted to the petitioners. CW-3033/1996 -Prem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment dt.23.10.08 3/3 In the result, the writ petitions fail, the same are hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/ (SANGEET LODHA), J.” 4. In view of the controversy involved in the present writ petition covered by the aforesaid decision of the coordinate Bench, this writ petition is also dismissed in the same terms. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.S/3 babulal/-