[2022] 13 S.C.R. 898

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
898
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 13 S.C.R.
[2022] 13 S.C.R. 898
898
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.
v.
ANJU RINI SAINI
(Civil Appeal No. 872 of 2022)
FEBRUARY 02, 2022
[K. M. JOSEPH AND HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Service Law – Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 – r.266-
A – Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 – r.11
– Applications were invited for filling up vacancies of Lower
Division Clerk (LDC), reservation was provided in the category of
women and certain number of posts were set apart for widows among
women – Respondent (a widow) not holding required qualification
Rajasthan State Certificate in Information Technology (RSCIT), her
application was rejected – Writ petition filed, allowed by Single
Judge relying on r.266-A – Decision confirmed by Division Bench
– On appeal, held: Respondent applied pursuant to the
advertisement issued in 2013 –She did not possess the essential
qualification, RSCIT – She acquired the qualification only in the
year 2014, well beyond the stipulated time – Thus, in view of not
possessing the essential qualification on the last date of application
or till the extended date, respondent was not eligible to be
considered when notification was issued in the year 2017, which
was not a fresh notification but a notification in continuation of the
earlier notification – Further, on facts there is no justification to
have extended r.266-A to the respondent – First essential requirement
for the application for r.266-A is that the widow/divorcee must have
been appointed – However, respondent was never appointed to the
post in question to clothe her with a right u/r.266-A – Also, the post
concerned in the present case is that of LDC (Vidyalay Sahayak)
which is different from the post indicated in r.266-A – r.266A does
not deal with the qualification of RSCIT either –Respondent was
not eligible to be considered for appointment – Impugned judgment
set aside – Constitution of India – Article 136.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Educational
Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 provides that candidate should

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
899
possess the qualifications as provided thereunder besides
possessing the experience provided. Rule 266-A is the very
premise in the judgment of both the Division Bench and the
learned Single Judge. The respondent applied pursuant to the
advertisement which is issued in the year 2013 for the
appointment of Clerk. The respondent did not possess one of
the essential qualifications viz., RSCIT. This qualification could
not be acquired by her by the stipulated last date for filing of the
applications. She could not, what is more, acquire the qualification
even within the extended period and her candidature could not
be processed further in terms of the advertisement. The later
development which took place is that she acquired qualification
in the year 2014, well beyond the stipulated time. Undoubtedly,
the advertisement was issued in the year 2017. From the
advertisement, it could be gathered that it is not a fresh
advertisement. Had it been a fresh advertisement calling for
applications and stipulating for a new date, which in the absence
of any date being prescribed in the advertisement could have
been taken as the date by which the application be made pursuant
thereto in the light of the decision rendered by this Court, the
matter would have been different. But what was contemplated
under the advertisement issued in 2017 was to taking the
recruitment of 2013 forward with respect to those who had
acquired eligibility in terms of the earlier advertisement issued
in the year 2013. This meant that those candidates who possessed
the qualification on the last date which was stipulated or at least
within the extended period, were alone to be considered. The
respondent filed an application. She therein does not dispute the
fact she did not possess the qualification of RSCIT in the year
2013. Treating it apparently as fresh advertisement, she m

…