The Rajasthan High Court has stayed the promotion to the post of IAS from non-state civil service. A petition was filed regarding this.

Senior advocates RN Mathur and Tanveer Ahmed have argued before the court on behalf of the petitioners. During the pendency of the petition, the state government issued a letter on February 17, 2023, seeking applications from all the departments this year as well.

For this reason, adjournment application was presented and it was said that there is no provision in the rule to replace non-state civil services officers who have become IAS. What is happening is not according to the rules. Because this can be done only in exceptional circumstances. Exception can never be considered a method of regular recruitment. Tanveer Ahmed said that the Rajasthan government has arbitrarily assumed that there is a reserved quota for non-state civil services officers as well.

In this, what has to happen according to the rules is not happening. Under the All India Service Act and the rules and regulations made thereunder, there is a provision to fill 66.67 percent of IAS by direct recruitment and 33.33 percent by promotion from among state administrative officers. Along with this, there is a provision that in case of special circumstances, up to 15 percent of this 33.33 percent can be filled by officers of other services.

But the Rajasthan government has arbitrarily made a tradition of filling non-state civil services officers every year and has accepted that 15 percent of 33.33 percent has to be filled by non-state civil service officers and the maximum To be filled up to the limit each time. It has been told that by violating the general rule, officers other than the State Administrative Service are being made IAAs by encroaching on the posts fixed for the officers of the State Administrative Service.

The division bench of Justices Manindra Mohan Srivastava and Praveer Bhatnagar has also made an oral comment on the basis on which the state government is treating it as a reserved quota. At the same time, the rules do not say that the state government cannot supplant a new rule at its own will. . Sometimes this can be done as an exception but it is not right to do this every year.

On behalf of the State Government, at the request of the Additional Advocate General, a week's time has been given to satisfy the court. But till then any action has been stayed on the recommendation of the Screening Committee. Now the hearing in the case will be held in the next week.