1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR

RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016

Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged

about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town,
Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) Mobile 9414711451
…Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through the Principal
Secretary, Law & Legal Affairs Department (Vidhi
Evam Vidhik Karya Vibhag), Government
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission
through the Secretary, Ghooghara Ghati, Ajmer.
….Respondents

S.B. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 14, 16 & 21 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ADVERTISEMENT DATED
18.09.2013 FOR THE POST OF JUNIOR LAW
OFFICER IN VIDHI AND VIDHIK KARYA
VIBHAG FOR TOTAL 150 POSTS
AND
IN THE MATTER OF DECLARING THE
RESULT ON 23.11.2015 AND THEREAFTER,
ISSUANCE OF THE WAITING LIST/RESERVE
LIST ON 03.12.2015 AND SENDING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT
ON 10.12.2015 BY THE RAJASTHAN PUBLIC
SERVICE COMMISSION
AND
IN THE MATTER OF UNDERTAKING THE
EXERCISE OF SCRUTINY OF THE
DOCUMENTS OF THE CANDIDATES OF THE
SAID LIST SEND BY THE RAJASTHAN PUBLIC
SERVICE COMMISSION ON 17.03.2016 BY
THE LAW AND LAW AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT BY ISSUING
AN ORDER ON 17.03.2016 DIRECTING THE
SELECTED CANDIDATES TO SUBMIT THEIR
DOCUMENTS OF EDUCATIONAL
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE WITH
ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS ALONG WITH
PASSPORT SIZE PHOTO
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST
APPOINTMENT ORDER BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.1 ON 30.03.2016 FOR TOTAL 115
CANDIDATES
AND
IN THE MATTER OF CIRCULAR DATED
05.05.2016 BY WHICH IT WAS PROVIDED
AGAINST THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED
30.03.2016 FOR TOTAL 115 POSTS, ONLY 58
CANDIDATES HAVE JOINED AND
INFORMATION OF JOINING OF REMAINING
58 CANDIDATES HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED
AND ACCORDINGLY, THEY WERE DIRECTED
TO IMMEDIATELY JOIN AND SEND THE
JOINING REPOT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ORDER DATED
23.05.2016 BY WHICH APPOINTMENT ORDER
OF 25 CANDIDATES WAS ISSUED
AND
IN THE MATTER OF SUBMISSION OF THE
REPRESENTATIONS DATED 13.04.2016,
03.05.2016 AND 04.05.2016 AND FURTHER,
ON 23.05.2016 BY THE PETITIONER
AND
IN THE MATTER OF NON-JOINING BY THE
CANDIDATES IN THE FIRST LIST OF
APPOINTMENT BECAUSE EITHER THEY ARE
ALREADY WORKING AS ASSISTANT PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR OR ON OTHER POSTS AS
MANY OF THEM HAVE SUBMITTED TO THE
DEPARTMENT IN WRITING THAT THEY DO
NOT WANT TO JOIN THE POST OF JUNIOR
LAW OFFICER AND MANY CANDIDATES
HAVE ALREADY BEEN SELECTED IN THE
INTERVENING PERIOD IN RAJASTHAN
JUDICIAL SERVICES FOR OTHER POSTS
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THERE BEING NO
CONSCIOUS DECISION ON THE PART OF
THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO FILL THE
TOTAL 150 POSTS, WHICH WERE
ADVERTISED OR REMAINING POSTS, WHICH
HAVE REMAINED VACANT DUE TO NON-
JOINING OF THE CANDIDATES FROM THE
MAIN SELECT LIST IN PURSUANT TO THE
ORDERS DATED 30.03.2016 AND 23.05.2016
AND
 IN THE MATTER OF RIGHT OF THE
PETITIONER TO GET THE WAITING LIST
OPERATED IN VIEW OF THERE BEING NO
DECISION OF THE GOVERNMENT DURING
THE CURRENCY OF THE WAITING/RESERVE
LIST TO NOT FILL THE POSTS OF JUNIOR
LAW OFFICER IN PURSUANT TO THE
ADVERTISEMENT DATED 18.09.2013
AND
IN THE MATTER OF PRINCIPLES OF
NATURAL JUSTICE

To,
The Hon’ble Vacation Judge of the Rajasthan High
Court, Bench at Jaipur.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,

The humble petitioner, above named, most
respectfully begs to submit as under:-
1. That the petitioner is Citizen of India and the
cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble High Court, therefore, the petitioner is
entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble High Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India to redress genuine grievance
as detailed in the memo of the petition. Since the
cause of action is of same and similar nature,
therefore, this joint writ petition is maintainable
before this Hon’ble Court.
2. That all the petitioner is Law Graduates and
eligible for appointment and selection on the post of
“Junior Law Officer” in the Law & Legal Affairs
Department of the State Government.
3. That the respondents issued an advertisement on
18.09.2013 for total 150 posts of “Junior Law
Officer”. The copy of the advertisement dated
18.09.2013 is submitted herewith and marked as
Annexure-1.
4. That all the petitioner being fully qualified and
eligible, applied for the post of “Junior Law Officer”
in pursuant to the advertisement (Annexure-1)
dated 18.09.2013 and accordingly, they were
allowed to participate in the selection process by the
respondents. The written examination was
conducted by the respondents in June, 2014 and
thereafter, the selected candidates were called for
the interview from 18.09.2015 to 23.11.2015. The
petitioner has also participated in the interview and
after conducting the interview of all the candidates,
who were found qualified and eligible for the
interview, the respondents declared the result on
23.11.2015. The copy of the result dated
23.11.2015 is submitted herewith and marked as
Annexure-2.
5. That on 03.12.2015, the reserved list/waiting list
was also issued by the respondents. The roll
numbers of all the petitioner find figure in the said
reserved list issued by the respondents. The copy of
the waiting list dated 03.12.2015 is submitted
herewith and marked as Annexure-3.
6. That for ready reference of this Hon’ble Court, a
table is reproduced below showing merit position of
all the petitioner, as under:-
S.No. Name of the Petitioner Merit Position
IN RESERVE
LIST
1. Rajeev Jindal 15
7. That the post of Junior Law Officer is governed by
the Rajasthan Legal State & Subordinate Service
Rules, 1981 and under Rule 24, it has been
specifically provided that “The Commission shall
prepare a list of the candidate whom they consider
suitable for appointment to the posts concerned and
arranged in the order of merit. The Commission
shall forward the list to the Appointing Authority
provided that the Commission may to the extent of
50% of the advertised vacancies, keep names of
suitable candidate on the reserve list. The
Commission may, on requisition, recommend the
names or such candidates in the order of merit to
the Appointing Authority within six months from
the date on which the original list is forwarded by
the Commission to the Appointing Authority”. Thus,
as a matter of fact, the original list was forwarded
by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for
short ‘the Commission’) to the Appointing Authority
on 10.12.2015.
8. That looking to the time constraint and life of the
waiting list being 6 months, it was incumbent upon
the respondent No.1 to undertake the exercise of
document verification immediate after receiving the
list, but much time was consumed by the
respondent No.1 in calling the candidates for
document verification from the original list
forwarded by the Commission and it was only on
17.03.2016, when the respondent No.1 issued an
order by which the candidates placed in the original
merit list/main select list, were called for the
document verification from 21.03.2016 to
22.03.2016. The copy of the order dated 17.03.2016
 issued by the Law & Legal Affairs Department of the
State Government is submitted herewith and
marked as Annexure-4.
9. That many candidates, who were also selected in
the intervening period from 18.09.2013 to March,
2016, on the posts of R.J.S., Assistant Public
Prosecutor or other better chances available to
them, did not come forward to submit their
documents/did not come for document verification,
thus total 146 candidates whose documents were
sought to be verified and accordingly, the
appointment order of 115 candidates was issued on
30.03.2016. The copy of the appointment order
dated 30.03.2016 is submitted herewith and
marked as Annexure-5.
10. That as a matter of fact, out of 155 candidates in
whose favour appointment orders were issued, only
58 candidates joined on the post of Junior Law
Officer and 57 candidates did not turn up to join on
the said post. Since, the petitioner is in the waiting
list and they are aware of the currency and life of
the waiting list, therefore, on 13.04.2016, the
petitioner approached the respondents submitting
an application and also to the Hon’ble Law Minister
and thereupon, the Hon’ble Law Minister instructed
to undertake the necessary exercise on the waiting
list. The copy of the representation dated
13.04.2016 is submitted herewith and marked as
Annexure-6.
11. That on 03.05.2016 also, the petitioner
submitted a representation to the respondents. The
copy of the representation dated 03.05.2016 is
submitted herewith and marked as Annexure-7.
12. That again on 04.05.2016, the petitioner
approached the respondents and also met the
Hon’ble Law Minister and thereupon, the Hon’ble
Law Minister again referred the matter to the
Principal Secretary of Law Department and
mentioned that period of 6 months is going to be
completed, the candidates, who are in the waiting
list, for their posting, file may be sent. The copy of
the representation dated 04.05.2016 bearing the
note of the Hon’ble Law Minister is also submitted
herewith and marked as Annexure-8.
13. That this fact is further getting strengthen as the
respondents themselves issued a circular on
05.05.2016 mentioning that vide order dated
30.03.2016, appointment order of 115 candidates
were issued and out of which, only 58 candidates
have joined and the information of remaining 57
candidates joining was not received and
accordingly, such candidates were directed to
immediately join. The copy of the circular dated
05.05.2016 is submitted herewith and marked as
Annexure-9.
14. That on 23.05.2016 also, the petitioner further
met the authorities and also the Hon’ble Law
Minister and thereupon; a letter was issued in
which it was mentioned that earlier also
instructions were given. The copy of the letter dated
23.05.2016 is submitted herewith and marked as
Annexure-10.
15. That as a matter of fact, 15 candidates have been
selected in the R.J.S. and after getting selection in
the R.J.S., it is not possible that they will join on
the post of Junior Law Officer.
16. That as a matter of fact many candidates in the
reserve list are such who are also selected on the
post of RJS or APP and on other posts.
17. That the life of the waiting list was only 6 months
commencing from 10.12.2015 and during this
period, the respondent No.1 was required to send
the requisition to the Commission on the posts in
question, which have not been filled by them as yet,
but no such exercise has been undertaken by the
respondents. Thus, the respondents cannot act in
an arbitrary manner as they are under obligation to
either take a decision not to fill the posts and for
that, reasons may also be assigned or else they are
under obligation to send the requisition for the
remaining posts, which have not been filled on
account of non-joining by the many candidates,
otherwise provisions regarding reserve list will
become redundant and since the respondents have
not taken any requisite exercise during the currency
of the waiting list, therefore, under such compelling
circumstances and having no other efficacious,
alternative and speedy remedy, the petitioner has
preferred the present writ petition before this
Hon'ble Court on the following amongst grounds: -

GROUNDS
a) Because from the documents placed on record,
it is clear that out of 150 posts advertised, the
respondents issued appointment order of only 115
candidates and out of 155 candidates, only 58
candidates have joined meaning thereby 92 posts of
Junior Law Officer are still lying vacant. Since, the
petitioner has placed in the waiting list, therefore,
he has a right to consider his candidature for
 appointment on the post of Junior Law Officer and
therefore, they have approached the respondents
well within time during the currency of the waiting
list and the respondents themselves have admitted
this fact that the posts are lying vacant due to non-
joining of the selected candidates. Further, the
Hon’ble Law Minister has also instructed for
necessary action for operating the waiting list, but
no action has been taken thereupon as yet. Thus,
interference by this Hon’ble Court is called for in the
interest of justice.
b) Because the selection and appointment is
made only amongst the eligible and available
candidates, who secured merit and if some
candidates do not opt for joining meaning thereby
they are not available for these posts and therefore,
despite of merit and eligibility because of their non-
availability for such posts, they have waived their
right and for such decision on the part of the
candidates in the first select list/main select list,
the rights of the next candidates in the order of
merit cannot be curtailed.
c) Because the merit has to be honoured as held
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Gujarat Engineers Association Versus State of
Gujarat & Ors.
d) Because there is no decision on the part of the
respondent No.1 to not fill the posts of Junior Law
Officer and therefore, it has to incumbent upon the
respondent No.1 to send the requisition to the
Commission that many candidates have not joined
and in place of such candidates, names from the
waiting list may be recommended and thereupon,
 the Commission has to recommend the names
otherwise the Commission has no occasion to know
that the department has still not filled the posts for
which it has sent requisition for conducting the
recruitment on 150 posts of Junior Law Officer.
Such action/ omission on the part of the
respondents has been deprecated by the Hon’ble
High Court also in a recent judgement. Thus, the
respondents are required to be directed to send the
requisition to the Commission for the posts, which
have remained unfilled and the Commission may
also be directed to send the recommendations from
the waiting list and thereafter, the respondents may
be directed to make appointment of the petitioner
on the post of Junior Law Officer in pursuant to the
advertisement dated 18.09.2013 in the interest of
justice.
e) Because there is nothing to the discredit of the
humble petitioner.
f) Because the petitioner craves leave to submit
other and further grounds at the time of arguments.
g) Because the petitioner has no other alternative
and efficacious remedy except to invoke the extra-
ordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India

PRAYER
It is, therefore humbly prayed that Your
Lordship may kindly be pleased to accept and allow
the writ petition of the humble petitioner and by an
appropriate writ, order or direction:-
1. The complete record may be called from the
respondents realting to recruitment on the post of
Junior Law Officer .
2. The inaction /omission in not taking decision
timely during currency of the waiting list and not
sending recommendation from waiting list on the
part of the respondents may be declared arbitrary
and illegal and accordingly respondents may kindly
be directed to operate the waiting list for
appointment on the post of Junior Law Officer and
the petitioner, who is placed in the waiting list, may
be ordered to be given appointment by the
respondents on the post of Junior Law Officer
without any further delay with all consequential
benefits and for this purpose, the respondent No.1
may be directed to send the requisition to the
Commission to recommend the names from the
waiting list in the interest of justice.
3. Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble
court deem just and proper may also be passed in
favour of the petitioner.
4. Cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in
favour of the petitioner.
HUMBLE PETITIONER
THROUGH COUNSEL

[TANVEER AHAMAD]
Advocate
Jaipur

Dated : ________/2016
NOTES :-
1. That this is S.B. Civil Writ Petition as no vires of
any Act is under challenge.
2. That no such similar writ petition prior to this has
been filed by the petitioner before any competent
court of law.
3. That PF, Notices and extra sets shall be filed as per
direction of the Hon’ble Court.
4. That Pie papers were not readily available; as such
the writ petition has been typed on stout papers by
my private steno.

[TANVEER AHAMAD]
Advocate
Jaipur
Dated : ________/2016
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016

Rajeev Jindal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRIT PETITION

I, Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged

about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town, Malviya
Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.), do hereby take oath and state as
under:-

1. That I am the Petitioner in the above mentioned case

therefore, I am well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case.
2. That the annexed writ petition has been drafted by my
counsel under my instructions. I have gone from
Para No.1 to 16 and grounds (a) to (g) thereof along
with prayer clause of the same and I have read over
the same and understood the same.
3. That the statements in the writ petition are true and
correct.

VERIFICATION

I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that

the contents of paras 1 to 3 of my above affidavit are true
and correct. Nothing material has been concealed
therein and no part of it is false. So help me God.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO……../2016

IN
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016

Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged

about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town,
Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)
…Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through the Principal
Secretary, Law & Legal Affairs Department (Vidhi &
Vidhik Karya Vibhag), Government Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission
through its Secretary, Ghooghara Ghati, Ajmer.
….Respondents

S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION UNDER

ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA
To,
The Hon’ble Vacation Judge of the Rajasthan High
Court, Bench at Jaipur.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,

The humble petitioner-applicant above named, most

respectfully begs to submit as under:-

1. That the petitioner has preferred annexed writ

petition numbered above, contents of the writ
petition may kindly be treated as part and parcel of
this stay application also for the sake of bulkiness
and brevity.
 2. That humble petitioner has a strong prima-facie
case in his favour, balance of convenience lies in his
favour and if petitioner is not granted interim
protection, he will face irreparable loss and injury,
which cannot be compensated in terms of money.

3. That principle of natural justice and equity also

demands that the interim order be passed in favour
of the petitioner.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this stay
application may kindly be allowed and during the
pendency of the writ petition, it may be directed that not
taking any action by the respondents during the currency
of the waiting list and expiry of the waiting list will not
come in the way and shall not be fatal towards
interest/right of the petitioner for getting appointment
being placed in the waiting list on account of vacancies
available due to non-joining/or otherwise for any other
reason (i.e non availability/ eligibility) by many
candidates in the main select list in the interest of
justice.
Any other appropriate order, which may be found
just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
case, be passed in favour of the petitioner.

HUMBLE PETITIONER-APPLICANT

THROUGH COUNSEL
Jaipur
Dated : ________/2016
[Tanveer Ahamad]
(Advocate)
NOTES :-

1. That no such application has been filed previously

before this Hon'ble Court.
2. That PF, Notices and extra sets shall be filed as per
direction of the Hon’ble Court.
3. That pie papers were not readily available; as such
the stay application has been typed on stout papers
by my private steno.

[Tanveer Ahamad]
(Advocate)
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO……../2016

IN
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016
Briz Raj Panchal Versus State of Raj. & Ors.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF STAY APPLICATION

I, Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged
about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town, Malviya
Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.), do hereby take oath and state as
under:-

1. That I am the Petitioner-Applicant in the above

mentioned case therefore, I am well conversant with
the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. That the annexed application has been drafted by

my counsel under my instructions. I have gone from
Para No. 1 to Para No. 3 of the same and I have read
over the same and understood the same.

3. That the statements in the application are true and

correct.

VERIFICATION
I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that
the contents of paras 1 to 3 of my above affidavit are true
and correct. Nothing material has been concealed
therein and no part of it is false. So help me God.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016

Rajeev Jindal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF DOCUMENTS

I, Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged

about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town, Malviya
Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.), do hereby take oath and state as
under:-

1. That I am the petitioner, I am fully conversant

with the facts and circumstances of the present
case.

2. That the Annexure-1 to 10 annexed with this writ

petition, are the true and correct photostat copies of
their originals.

VERIFICATION

I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that

the contents of paras 1 and 2 of my above affidavit are
true and correct. Nothing material has been concealed
therein and no part of it is false. So help me God.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016

Rajeev Jindal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

INDEX

Sl. Page
Particulars
No. No.
1 Writ Petition
2 Affidavit in support of Writ Petition
3 Stay Application
4 Affidavit in support of Application
5 Documents:
Annexure-1-Copy of advertisement
dated 18.09.2013
Annexure-2-Copy of result dated
23.11.2015
Annexure-3-Copy of waiting list dated
03.12.2015
Annexure-4-Copy of order dated
17.03.2016
Annexure-5-Copy of appointment
order dated 30.03.2016
Annexure-6-Copy of representation
dated 13.04.2016
Annexure-7-Copy of representation
dated 03.05.2016
Annexure-8-Copy of representation
dated 04.05.2016 bearing the note of
the Hon’ble Law Minister
Annexure-9-Copy of circular dated
05.05.2016
Annexure-10-Copy of letter dated
23.05.2016

6 Affidavit in support of documents

[TANVEER AHAMAD]
Advocate
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2016

Rajeev Jindal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

SYNOPSIS

- That all the petitioner is Law Graduate and entitled for the
appointment and selection on the post of “Junior Law Officer” in the Law
& Legal Affairs Department of the State Government.

- That the respondents issued an advertisement on 18.09.2013 for

total 150 posts of “Junior Law Officer”.

- That all the petitioner being fully qualified and eligible, applied for
the post of “Junior Law Officer” in pursuant to the advertisement
(Annexure-1) dated 18.09.2013 and accordingly, they were allowed to
participate in the selection process by the respondents. The written
examination was conducted by the respondents in June, 2014 and
thereafter, the selected candidates were called for the interview from
18.09.2015 to 21.11.2015. The petitioner has also participated in the
interview and after conducting the interview of all the candidates, who
were found qualified and eligible for the interview, the respondents
declared the result on 23.11.2015.

- That on 03.12.2015, the reserved list/waiting list was also issued

by the respondents. The roll numbers of all the petitioner find figure in
the said reserved list issued by the respondents.

- That the post of Junior Law Officer is governed by the Rajasthan

Legal State & Subordinate Service Rules, 1981 and under Rule 24, it has
been specifically provided that “The Commission shall prepare a list of
the candidate whom they consider suitable for appointment to the posts
concerned and arranged in the order of merit. The Commission shall
forward the list to the Appointing Authority provided that the
Commission may to the extent of 50% of the advertised vacancies, keep
names of suitable candidate on the reserve list. The Commission may, on
requisition, recommend the names or such candidates in the order of
merit to the Appointing Authority within six months from the date on
which the original list is forwarded by the Commission to the Appointing
Authority”. Thus, as a matter of fact, the original list was forwarded by
the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short ‘the Commission’) to
the Appointing Authority on 10.12.2015.

- That looking to the time constraint and life of the waiting list being
6 months, it was incumbent upon the respondent No.1 to undertake the
exercise of document verification immediate after receiving the list, but
much time was consumed by the respondent No.1 in calling the
candidates for document verification from the original list forwarded by
the Commission and it was only on 17.03.2016, when the respondent
No.1 issued an order by which the candidates placed in the original merit
list/main select list, were called for the document verification from
21.03.2016 to 22.03.2016.

- That many candidates, who were also selected in the intervening

period from 18.09.2013 to March, 2016, on the posts of R.J.S., Assistant
Public Prosecutor or other better chances available to them, did not come
forward to submit their documents/did not come for document
verification, thus total 146 candidates whose documents were sought to
be verified and accordingly, the appointment order of 115 candidates was
issued on 30.03.2016.

- That as a matter of fact, out of 155 candidates in whose favour

appointment orders were issued, only 58 candidates joined on the post of
Junior Law Officer and 57 candidates did not turn up to join on the said
post. Since, the petitioner is in the waiting list and they are aware of the
currency and life of the waiting list, therefore, on 13.04.2016, the
petitioner approached the respondents submitting an application and
also to the Hon’ble Law Minister and thereupon, the Hon’ble Law
Minister instructed to undertake the necessary exercise on the waiting
list.

- That on 03.05.2016 also, the petitioner submitted a

representation to the respondents.

- That again on 04.05.2016, the petitioner approached the

respondents and also met the Hon’ble Law Minister and thereupon, the
Hon’ble Law Minister again referred the matter to the Principal Secretary
of Law Department and mentioned that period of 6 months is going to be
completed, the candidates, who are in the waiting list, for their posting,
file may be sent.

- That this fact is further getting strengthen as the respondents

themselves issued a circular on 05.05.2016 mentioning that vide order
dated 30.03.2016, appointment order of 115 candidates were issued and
out of which, only 58 candidates have joined and the information of
remaining 57 candidates joining was not received and accordingly, such
candidates were directed to immediately join.

- That on 23.05.2016 also, the petitioner further met the authorities

and also the Hon’ble Law Minister and thereupon; a letter was issued in
which it was mentioned that earlier also instructions were given.

- That as a matter of fact, 15 candidates have been selected in the

R.J.S. and after getting selection in the R.J.S., it is not possible that they
will join on the post of Junior Law Officer.

- That the life of the waiting list was only 6 months commencing
from 10.12.2015 and during this period, the respondent No.1 was
required to send the requisition to the Commission on the posts in
question, which have not been filled by them as yet, but no such exercise
has been undertaken by the respondents. Thus, the respondents cannot
act in an arbitrary manner as they are under obligation to either take a
decision not to fill the posts and for that, reasons may also be assigned
or else they are under obligation to send the requisition for the remaining
posts, which have not been filled on account of non-joining by the many
candidates, otherwise provisions regarding reserve list will become
redundant and since the respondents have not taken any requisite
exercise during the currency of the waiting list.

- Hence, this writ petition.

[TANVEER AHAMAD]
Advocate
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR
REGD. ADDRESS :

S.B.C.W. PETITION NO.………………………./2016

Rajeev Jindal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

THAT in the above case registered address of the

petitioner

Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged

about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town,
Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)
 VAKALATNAMA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR

RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR
Case_SBCW Petition No._____________/2016
Rajeev Jindal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

KNOW ALL MEN by these present that I/ we the

undersigned, We,
Rajeev Jindal S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal aged
about 28 years resident of B-42, Model Town,
Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)
in the above case do hereby make, constitute and appoint.
Shri Tanveer Ahamad, Advocate,
R/2303/2003
my/ our true and lawful attorneys, for me/us in my/our name, and on my/our
behalf to appear plead and act in the said case, and more particularly to draw,
make, present, withdraw, amend, represent and verify petition, plaints or
written statements and to make, present applications or petitions in the court,
to present withdraw and receive documents and any money from the Court or
from the opposite party either in execution of the decree or otherwise, and on
receipt of payment thereof to sign and deliver for me/us proper receipts and
discharges for the same, to compromise or to refer the case to arbitration, to
seek execution of the decree or any orders in the case, to draw, make present,
withdraw, amend and represent any memorandum of appeal or cross objections
in any appeal arising or to seek reviews or revision of any Judgment, decree or
order in the case, to appear, conduct and plead in all such writ / appeals /
revisions and reviews, and to do all other lawful acts and things as effectually as
I/we could do the same whether being personally present or otherwise, My/ our
said counsel is/are also hereby authorized and empowered to instruct, engage
or appoint any other counsel or counsels to appear, plead and act with or for
him/them in his/their absence or otherwise as my/our said counsel may think
proper to do so, all acts of such counsel or counsels shall be equally and
similarly binding on me/us as if done be my/our said counsel and as if done by
me/us personally.

I/We hereby agree that if any part of the said counsel's fee remains
unpaid before the first hearing of the case, or if any hearing of the case be fixed
on tour or at any other place except the usual court premises, then my/our said
counsel will not be bound to appear before the court. The counsel's fee now
settled and agreed to is in respect of this Court and for the pending proceedings
only. Any fresh action hereafter taken will entitle the counsel to fresh fees. I/We
also agree that if the case be dismissed in default or if it be proceeded ex-parte
under any circumstances whatsoever the said counsel shall not be held
responsible for the same and all whatsoever my/our said counsel shall do in
connection with the said case, I/We do hereby agree to ratify and confirm. Any
costs awarded in the case at any time in my/our favour shall form part of the
counsel's claim and shall be payable to him /them in addition to his/their fees
in the case.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF I/we have hereto set my/our hand (s) at

____________________this____________________day of _____________________ and
delivered to the said counsel (S)

Accepted

(Tanveer Ahamad)
Advocate