RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, AJMER & ANR.versusSHIKUN RAM FIRODA & ANR.

1092                      [2019]REPORTS
                SUPREME COURT    13 S.C.R. 1092             [2019] 13 S.C.R.


 A             RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
                          AJMER & ANR.
                                         v.
                        SHIKUN RAM FIRODA & ANR.
 B                        (Civil Appeal No. 8146 of 2019)
                               OCTOBER 25, 2019
            [L. NAGESWARA RAO AND HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.]
               Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services (Direct Recruitment
 C     by Combined Competitive Examination) Rules, 1999 – Advertisement
       published on 18.06.13 inviting applications for various posts in
       the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services under the 1999 Rules
       – Press Note issued on 10.07.14 cancelling the examination on
       account of certain irregularities – On 12.11.14, another Press Note
       was issued giving opportunity to the candidates to make corrections
 D     in their online application forms and change of category – Last
       date of submission of application forms was 31.07.13 and the
       preliminary examination was conducted on 26.10.13 – Respondents
       were serving in the Army on the last date of submission of form as
       also on the date of preliminary examination – One of the writ
 E     petitioners, retired on 31.07.14 but applied for change of status
       from General Category to Ex-servicemen Category in pursuance of
       the Press Note dtd. 12.11.14 – Change not accepted – Writ petitions
       filed – Dismissed holding that on the last date of submission of
       form the writ petitioner was not Ex-Servicemen and hence cannot
 F     be treated as such – Order set aside by Division Bench – Held:
       Press Note was issued only to allow the corrections or to change
       category in the application forms already submitted online – It was
       not issued for giving an opportunity to the candidates to apply afresh
       – Therefore, what could be corrected was the mistake or the category
       i.e. from General to any of the reserved category or vice-versa but
 G     not that a candidate who is not eligible in terms of advertisement
       issued on 18.06.13 becomes eligible under the guise of correction
       of mistakes – High Court erred in law in shifting the eligible date
       on the basis of Press Note which was restricted only for correction
       of mistakes or change of category – Order of the Division Bench
 H
                                       1092
            RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,                      1093
           AJMER & ANR. v. SHIKUN RAM FIRUDA & ANR.


set aside – Further, all the Army personnel appointed and joined in   A
the category of Ex-servicemen in terms of the orders passed by the
Division Bench will continue as such but, no other candidate will
be appointed in terms of the order passed by the High Court –
Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-servicemen) Rules, 1988
– r.6B – Constitution of India – Art.142 – Service Law.               B
      Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-servicemen) Rules,
1988 – Amendment, r.6B inserted on 21.05.19 – Operation and
applicability of – Discussed.
      Allowing the appeals, the Court
                                                                      C
       HELD: 1. The Press Note was issued only to allow the
corrections or to change category in the application forms already
submitted online. Press Note was not issued for giving an
opportunity to the candidates to apply afresh. Therefore, what
could be corrected was the mistake or the category i.e. from
General to any of the reserved category or vice-versa but not         D
that a candidate who is not eligible in terms of advertisement
issued on 18 th June, 2013 becomes eligible under the guise of
correction of mistakes. The High Court erred in law in shifting
the eligible date on the basis of Press Note which was restricted
only for correction of mistakes or change of category. An Army        E
personnel who is retiring within forthcoming one year was not
eligible prior to amendment on 21st May, 2019. It is only on 21st
May, 2019, an Army personnel who is retiring within forthcoming
one year becomes eligible to apply for the State Services. Such
amendment has not been given retrospective effect nor such
amendment is clarificatory amendment as it confers a new right        F
to the personnel retiring within next one year for the first time.
Thus, the order passed by the Division Bench cannot be sustained
and is thus set aside. All those Army personnel who have been
appointed and joined in the category of Ex-servicemen in terms
of the orders passed by the Division Bench of the High Court          G
will continue as such but no other candidate will be appointed in
terms of the order passed by the High Court. [Paras 8-10][1096-
H; 1097-A-F]


                                                                      H
1094                 SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2019] 13 S.C.R.


 A           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8146
       of 2019.
             From the Judgment and Order dated 09.10.2017 of the High
       Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B. Special Appeal
       Writ No. 818 of 2017.
 B
                                          With
                 Civil Appeal Nos. 8148-8149, 8147, 8150 of 2019.
              Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv., Satyendra Kumar, Shailja Nanda
       Mishra, Harsha Vinoy, Arpit Parkash, D. K. Devesh, Surya Kant, Pranav
 C
       Vyas, Ms. Priyanka Tyagi, Kaustubh Anshuraj, Pankaj Mehta, Harshit
       Agarwal, Ms. Shweta Soni, Vikrant Singh Bais, Milind Kumar, Advs.
       for the appearing parties.
                 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
 D               HEMANT GUPTA, J.
              1. The challenge in these appeals is to an order passed by the
       Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur
       on 26th May, 2017, which is the subject matter of Civil Appeal Nos.
       8148-8149 of 2019 and the orders passed on different dates following
 E     the said order.
              2. The brief facts leading to the present appeals are that an
       advertisement was published on 18th June, 2013 inviting applications for
       various posts in the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services under the
       Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services (Direct Recruitment by
 F
       Combined Competitive Examination) Rules, 19991. Number of posts
       advertised were 233 in the State Services and 490 in the Subordinate
       Services. A corrigendum was issued on 24th June, 2013 increasing number
       of posts to 990. It was on 10th July, 2014, a Press Note was issued
       cancelling the examination on account of certain irregularities which
 G     came to the notice of the Commission. On 12th November, 2014, another
       Press Note was issued, which has led to the present set of appeals. The
       Press Note gave an opportunity to the candidates to make corrections in
       their online application forms and change of category after payment of
       Rs.100/-. The said Press Note reads as under:
       1
 H         for short, ‘Rules’
           RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,                               1095
 AJMER & ANR. v. SHIKUN RAM FIRUDA & ANR. [HEMANT GUPTA, J.]


      “                           “PRESS NOTE”                                A
      That, an opportunity is given to the applicants, who have applied
      online for recruitment of Rajasthan Subordinate Service 2013 to
      correct the mistakes category change or make any other
      amendment in their application forms online.
                                                                              B
      The amendments can be done by paying Rs.100/- through e-mitra/
      online Banking. The correction/ amendment can be done online
      on the website of the commission i.e. rpconline.rajasthan.gov.in
      from 13.11.2014 to 28.11.2014 (till midnight 12:00). Any written
      application for correction will not be accepted. Application for
      correction will not be accepted by the Commission after due date.       C
                                                          (N.K. Thakral)
                                                              Secretary”
       3. The last date of submission of application forms was 31st July,
2013 and the preliminary examination was conducted on 26 th October,
                                                                              D
2013. The respondents, who shall hereinafter be called as writ petitioners,
were serving in the Army on the last date of submission of application
form as also on the date on which preliminary examination was held on
26th October, 2013. Laxman Singh, one of the writ petitioners, retired on
31st July, 2014 but applied for change of status from General Category
to Ex-servicemen Category in pursuance of the Press Note dated 12th           E
November, 2014. Since, such change was not accepted, writ petitions
were filed. Writ petition filed by Laxman Singh was dismissed by the
learned Single Bench on 9th November, 2016 holding as under:
      “It is admitted fact that on 31.07.2013 which was last date of
      submission of application form petitioner was not Ex-servicemen         F
      and could only be treated in the category of OBC. Therefore, on
      31.07.2013, petitioner was not Ex-servicemen, he cannot be
      considered as such. Therefore, action of the respondent to reject
      the candidature of the petitioner under the Ex-servicemen category
      cannot be faulted with. However, the petitioner be considered as        G
      per the merit list under the category of OBC.”
       4. Such order was set aside in appeal on 26th May, 2017, inter
alia, on the ground that the Press Note has the effect of shifting the
date of eligibility. It was held as under:
                                                                              H
1096             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2019] 13 S.C.R.


 A           “The view taken by the learned Single Judge in the impugned
             decision that the two had yet to acquire the status of Ex-servicemen
             by the last date for filling the applications pursuant to the
             advertisement dated June 18, 2013, has overlooked the fact that
             on November 12, 2014 another advertisement was issued which
 B           would have the effect of shifting the date of eligibility norms
             acquiring to November 28, 2014.”
             5. It is the said order or the orders following the said order are the
       subject matter of challenge in the present set of appeals.
              6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Commission argued
 C     that the Press Note was issued giving an opportunity to the candidates
       to correct the mistakes consequent to cancellation of online examination
       process. The permissible corrections which can be made were category
       change i.e. from General to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other
       Backward Classes, Ex-servicemen or vice-versa but a candidate who
 D     was not eligible on the last date of submission of application forms cannot
       be treated to be eligible only because the candidates were permitted to
       correct the mistakes and update their categories. It is argued that the
       Division Bench of the High Court was not justified in holding that the
       date of eligibility stand shifted in terms of the Press Note. It is further
       argued that the Press Note was not to invite fresh applications but only
 E     to make corrections in the application forms already submitted.
       Therefore, a candidate who is not eligible on the last date of submission
       of application cannot be treated to be eligible in the category of Ex-
       servicemen when the writ petitioners were in active service on the last
       date of submission of application forms.
 F            7. Learned counsel for the respondents have referred to an
       amendment in the Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Ex-
       servicemen) Rules, 1988, wherein Rule 6B has been inserted on 21 st
       May, 2019. The amendment makes a candidate eligible to apply in the
       category of Ex-servicemen who is retiring within forthcoming one year.
 G     Thus, it is contended that the intention of the Public Service Commission
       and the State when Press Note was issued was to provide an opportunity
       to the members of the Army who were retiring in the near future to
       compete for State Civil Services.
             8. We find merit in the argument raised by the learned counsel for
       the appellants. The Press Note was issued only to allow the corrections
 H
           RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,                                 1097
 AJMER & ANR. v. SHIKUN RAM FIRUDA & ANR. [HEMANT GUPTA, J.]


or to change category in the application forms already submitted online.        A
Press Note was not issued for giving an opportunity to the candidates to
apply afresh. Therefore, what could be corrected was the mistake or
the category i.e. from General to any of the reserved category or vice-
versa but not that a candidate who is not eligible in terms of advertisement
issued on 18th June, 2013 becomes eligible under the guise of correction
                                                                                B
of mistakes. We find that the High Court has erred in law in shifting the
eligible date on the basis of Press Note which was restricted only for
correction of mistakes or change of category.
       9. We do not find any merit in the argument raised by the learned
counsel for the respondents. In fact, such argument supports the argument
raised by the appellants that an Army personnel who is retiring within          C
forthcoming one year was not eligible prior to amendment on
21st May, 2019. It is only on 21st May, 2019, an Army personnel who is
retiring within forthcoming one year becomes eligible to apply for the
State Services. Such amendment has not been given retrospective effect
nor such amendment is clarificatory amendment as it confers a new               D
right to the personnel retiring within next one year for the first time.
Thus, the order passed by the Division Bench cannot be sustained and is
thus set aside.
       10. We have been informed that in terms of order passed by the
Division Bench of the High Court, certain candidates have been appointed        E
and have joined the State services, though subject to the decision of the
present proceedings. Therefore, in exercise of powers conferred under
Article 142 of the Constitution of India, we order that all those Army
personnel who have been appointed and joined in the category of Ex-
servicemen in terms of the orders passed by the Division Bench of the
High Court will continue as such but no other candidate will be appointed       F
in terms of the order passed by the High Court.
      11. The appeals are thus allowed.


Divya Pandey                                                 Appeals allowed.   G




                                                                                H