1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7693/2008 Rajwanti v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 18 th November, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Vikash Bijarniya, for the petitioner. Mr. B.L.Tiwari, for the respondents. .... In pursuant to the notification dated 7.4.2008 the petitioner faced process of selection for the purpose of appointment to the post of Constable in District Udaipur. The candidature of the petitioner was considered against the vacancies reserved for women candidates, however, she was not found selected, thus, appointment was not accorded to her. By this petition for writ the petitioner is claiming for appointment as Constable in view of the fact that she qualified written and physical test conducted by the respondents as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1989”). In reply to the writ petition the stand of the respondents is that though the petitioner qualified written test as well as physical test, however, she failed to secure 36% marks in interview as required according to Rule 23 of the Rules of 1989, 2 therefore, she was not selected for appointment. Alongwith reply to the writ petition the respondents have also placed on record a statement of marks relating to the petitioner wherein it is specifically mentioned that the petitioner secured only two marks out of ten maximum marks in interview. As per Rule 23 of the Rules of 1989 the Board could not have recommended names of the candidates for appointment who have secured less than 36% marks in interview. The petitioner in view of the fact that she secured marks less than 36% in interview, therefore, rightly not accorded appointment by the respondents. For the reasons mentioned above the petition for writ is having no merit, hence dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.