Rajasthan HC Orders Woman's Appointment As Clerk Denied For Taking Back Original Documents In Bonafide Belief That Selection Process Is Over

The Rajasthan High Court directed the appointment of a woman as a clerk, who scored more marks compared to candidates in fourth waiting list but was denied appointment on the ground that after issuance of three supplementary select lists and believing the process to be over, she took back her original documents signing a pre-typed affidavit stating that she won't raise any claim to the post in future.

Justice Arun Monga held that the State itself created a situation, by retaining her original documents inordinately, that the petitioner was compelled to seek return of those documents to be able to apply for other posts. Furthermore, the purpose for which the documents were retained i.e. verification, was already completed. Noting that neither her eligibility, nor the merit, nor the score obtained by the petitioner was disputed by the respondents, it further said:

"Petitioner thereafter was under the bona fide belief that after the main select list, since three more subsequent supplementary select lists have already been issued, that was the end of the selection process. Be that as it may, being aspirant to compete in the other selection processes, petitioner needed her original documents, which had already been verified in the document verification process earlier carried out for the first time pursuant to the declaration of the result on 17.10.2022.  The petitioner needed those original documents to apply pursuant to the other advertisements and, therefore, to the extent that the documents were being retained inordinately by the respondents, she approached the respondents rightfully as advised to her that the same would be returned subject to her giving an affidavit on dotted lines, which as it appears were already pre-typed in Hindi". 

The court said that this affidavit is now being held against her that since she had deposed that she will not claim any benefit from the recruitment process, she cannot be offered the post despite being meritorious.

"I am unable to persuade myself with the stand taken by the respondents. The same is being noted only to be rejected. Petitioner had though stated in para 6 of her affidavit that she would not raise any claim in future arising out of return of documents, but she did depose that she will not be entitled to be appointed even if subsequently found meritorious. Her statement is being misread totally out of context by the respondents. It is the respondents, who have themselves created a situation, even if unwittingly, where the petitioner was compelled to seek return of her documents due to delay in the process of selection and that too only after the documents had been verified". 

The court noted that there were only 12 posts of LDC in the OBC category in Zila Parishad, Jodhpur and all of them have already been filled up and the State had opposed grant of any relief to the petitioner at this stage on the ground of delay and latches due to nonavailability of vacant post.

The court said that such a stand cannot be accepted as "delay & latches are more attributable to the respondents" and the same cannot be countenanced to give them any advantage of their own wrong.

The petitioner had applied for the post of Lower Division Clerk in 2013 under OBC female category. In pursuance of the notice dated 17.10.2022 and the third waiting list, the petitioner was called for document verification. However, she was not selected due to her lower merit compared to the selected candidates. After the selection process concluded, the petitioner retrieved her original documents from the Zila Parishad, Jodhpur.

Subsequently a fourth waiting list for recruitment to the LDC post was issued and candidates were instructed to submit their claims by 24.07.2023 and undergo document verification on 25.07.2023. It is pleaded that since the petitioner scored 56.644 marks, she should have been appointed to the LDC post. However, her name was not included in the merit list without any valid reason, while 32 candidates with lower marks than the petitioner were included in the fourth waiting list under the OBC Non-Creamy Layer Female category. Hence, this petition.

It was the case of the State that there was specific condition stipulated for document verification as per which if a candidate had submitted original documents, these were returnable only after completion of the final selection process. Despite being aware of this condition, the petitioner submitted an application along with an affidavit seeking return of the original documents. Now she has approached the Court to have her documents re-verified at the Zila Parishad, Jodhpur, even though she had already taken them back herself. Since she herself had taken them back, she cannot be now permitted to undergo document verification for the post.

Rejecting the position of the State, It was opined that,

“In case subsequently the petitioner was held meritorious for selection as per the fourth list, wherein, concededly candidates having lesser marks were also included, it was incumbent on the respondents to inform her that since she is on the select list she should submit the documents to be retained by the department in the service record. The entire purpose of retaining the documents is to keep copy of the same in the service record of the selected candidates. The other purpose of course is the verification of the same to ascertain the genuineness thereof.”

In this background, it was held that to maintain balance of equity, instead of quashing the entire selection process, the petitioner could be given the benefit of appointment.

Accordingly, the State was directed to appoint the petitioner. In absence of any vacancy, a supernumerary post was directed to be created that shall be reduced from the future vacancies.

Case Title: Radha v the State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 121

Click Here To Read/Download Order