SBCWP NO.5950/08. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.5950/2008. Chand Mal Bunkar Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of order:- July 20, 2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Sandeep Bhagwati for the petitioner. Shri S.N. Kumawat, Additional Advocate General. ***** BY THE COURT:- This writ petition has been filed contending that in terms of para 4 of the advertisement, the marks obtained by petitioner in the written examination may be directed to be added for determining the merit of the candidates for appointment on the post of Lecturer in the subject of Economics. 2) Shri Sandeep Bhagwati, learned counsel for the petitioner has cited Rule 19A inserted to Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970 vide amendment notification dated 1/7/1988 and argued that according to the said rule, written examination viva voce is part of selection and should be used to determine the merit. SBCWP NO.5950/08. 2 3) Shri S.N. Kumawat, Additional Advocate General, learned counsel for R.P.S.C. submits that the written examination in Rules 19A as well as 18A are inserted in the Rules of 1970 in view of Rule 16 of the said notification. Said amendments included only posts of District Education Officer (Boys/Girls), Deputy Director (Junior) and Vice- Principal, I.A.S.E., Ajmer/Professor, I.A.S.E., Ajmer/Bikaner. Written examinations which the respondents are conducting pursuant to the advertisement Annexure-1 dated 10/5/2008 was meant only to short list large number of candidates who had applied for this post and that was aimed at reducing the number of candidates for the purpose of ultimate selection. Learned counsel cited the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Smt.Usha Sharma Vs. State : 2007(4) WLC 411. 4) Shri Sandeep Bhagwati, learned counsel for the petitioner rejoined and submitted that the aforesaid amended rules were not noticed by the Division Bench in Smt.Usha Sharma supra therefore judgment is distinguishable. 5) Having regard to the facts of the case and perused the impugned order, I find that the rule which refers to post specifically for the purpose of written examination and makes written examination as interview part of selection is Rule 16 which by way of amendment was inserted the above referred to posts and corresponding amendment has been inserted SBCWP NO.5950/08. 3 in Rule 18A. There is no rule which names the posts of Lecturer in various subjects to say that for in recruitment process thereof written examination shall be conducted. In Smt.Usha Sharma supra also, the controversy was the same where petitioner/appellant was claiming marks of the written examination to be made the basis of selection. Division Bench held that the object of written examination was shortlisting of the candidates and the marks obtained could not have been taken the basis for preparing merit of the candidates. Division Bench held that if the Commission had taken into consideration the marks obtained in the written examination for assessing the merit of the candidates, it would have acted in contravention of Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Educational Service Rules, 1970. What is being insisted upon by the petitioner, cannot be accepted just on the basis of inferences or analogy to be drawn froom Rule 19A. In view of above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil