Granting Additional Bonus Marks To Particular Group Of Personnel Based On Their District Or Place Of Posting Violates Right To Equality: Rajasthan HC
The Rajasthan High Court held that granting of additional bonus marks to a particular group of personnel based on their present place or district of posting is violative of Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution.
The Jaipur Bench held thus in a batch of Civil Writ Petitions in which the legal issue was “whether 10 additional bonus marks can be granted to the candidates/personnels, for opting their present place of posting?”
A Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed, “… this Court finds that granting of 10 additional bonus marks to a particular group of personnel of the district, if they opt their present place/district of posting, is violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India when tested on the anvil of Right to Equality and it creates a class of unequals amongst equals. There is no nexus between the Rules of 2023 and aforesaid condition No.9 of the advertisement as to grant of 10 additional bonus marks in the written examination.”
Advocate R.P. Saini represented the Petitioners while Advocate General Rajendra Prasad represented the Respondents.
In this case, a challenge was made against one condition of the advertisement issued by the Director, Secondary Education for selection and appointment on the post of Teachers in the Mahatma Gandhi Government English Medium Schools and Swami Vivekanand Government Model Schools (SVGMS) and all other Government English Medium Schools. The legal issue involved was whether grant of additional bonus marks to such candidates amounts to violation of the Fundamental Rights of other candidates contained under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution. It was in this background the issue involved was required to be considered.
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, said, “This Court is of a clear and specific view that the State has to follow the provisions which are meant for the welfare of the people, but the State cannot create any artificial classification which results in discrimination between two equals and similarly situated persons. All the candidates, who apply for getting appointment, are entitled for selection on the basis of similar criteria of selection, as prescribed under the Rules. Granting additional bonus marks to a particular set of individual is not justified.”
The Court held that, awarding any bonus marks to the personnel who are posted in a particular district and opted for the same place/district of posting, in terms of the condition of advertisement amounts to impermissible discrimination.
“There is no rational basis for such preferential treatment, on the material available before this Court. The ostensible reasons put forward to distinguish the candidates by way of awarding 10 additional bonus marks, as provided under Condition No.9 of the advertisement are either non-existent or irrelevant, having no nexus with the object sought to be achieved”, it added.
The Court further noted that the offending part of the impugned condition of advertisement has the effect of diluting merit, without in any way promoting the objective and that the same is violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
“Hence, the impugned condition No.9 of the advertisement dated 11.07.2024, insofar as the award of 10 additional bonus marks is liable to be and is hereby declared illegal and unconstitutional”, it observed.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petitions and quashed the impugned condition of the advertisement.
Cause Title- Mohan Lal Sharma & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:RJ-JP:44915)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates R.P. Saini, Rishi Raj Maheshwari, Gopesh Kumar, and Aamir Khan.
Respondents: Advocate General Rajendra Prasad, AAG B.S. Chhaba, Advocates Harshita Thakral, and Avinash Choudhary.
