S.B. C. Writ Petition No.5292/97. (Mrs Sanjani Sharma Vs. RSEB, Jaipur) Date of Order: 01/04/2010. HON'BLE MR. MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,J. Mr. Hemant Sharma for Mr RD Rastogi, for the petitioner. Mr. Saugath Roy, for the respondent. This writ petition was filed way back in the year 1997 inter alia with the prayer that the respondents be directed that the selections made by the respondent on the post of Personnel Officer on 12.8.97 may be quashed and set aside and the respondent be directed to hold fresh interview for such appointments. The contention of the petitioner is that there was 20% reservation for the women in terms of the amendment made by the Government in its various service rules and there were total number of 9 posts, and therefore, accordingly, reservation should have been given to the females. It is contended that the State Government has significant control over the activities of the respondent and the respondent has therefore to adopt the rules and regulations framed by the State Government and also the amendment in the service rules which were made by State of Rajasthan vide Notification dated 21.1.1997. Therefore, by necessary implication, the rules of the Government should be applicable to the establishment of the respondent. The petitioner is highly qualified as she was First Division throughout her academic career from Secondary School Examinations, and there was no reason for the respondent not to call for her interview. If there were 9 posts, the petitioner should also have been called for interview. The action of the respondent in not considering her be held to be illegal. The learned counsel for the respondent opposed the writ petition and submitted that out of 9 posts, 4 posts were reserved for SC/ST and only 5 posts were left to be filled from General Category and since only 15 candidates from General Category were called whereas the name of the petitioner was at Serial No.19, no illegality has been committed in not calling the petitioner for interview. The learned counsel for the respondent has produced for perusal of the Court, the notification issued by the Rajasthan State Electricity Board on 24.5.99 thereby amending the earlier order of the Board dated 5.4.99 to show that the reservation would be provided to the women candidates. It is submitted that the rules do not automatically apply to the services of the respondent and that a policy decision has to be taken for adopting said rules. The necessary amendments adopting the government rules having been made much after the selection in question, the petitioner could not be held eligible to reservation. Even otherwise, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there are two more women candidates above the petitioner in merit, and therefore, she should not be straight away considered for appointment. In view of the detailed explanation given by the respondent and the fact that apart from the petitioner, two more women are above her in merit, merely in non-calling of the petitioner to interview, the respondent cannot be said to have committed any illegality. I do not find any merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. Gandhi/-P.A. Item no. 10