Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Bhagwanti Karmani vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 December, 2021
Bench: Arun Bhansali
(1 of 3)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12983/2019
Smt. Bhagwanti Karmani D/o Shri Mohanlal Karmani Wd/o Late
Shri Prakash Lokwani, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 1-G-35, Old
Housing Board, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To
The Government, Department Of Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Principal Secretary (Primary Education), Government Of
Rajasthan.
3. Jila Parishad, Bhilwara, Through Chief Executive Officer,
Jila Parishad, Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5812/2018
Alak Nanda Mali D/o Shri Gulab Chand Mali, R/o New Colony,
Near Irrigation Department, Sawar, Post Sawar, Tehsil Kekri,
District Ajmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary
Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. Zila Parishad Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Zila
Parishad Bhilwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Usman Ghani.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajdeep Singh Chouhan for
Mr. Manish Tak.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
16/12/2021
The matters come-up on an application filed by the
petitioners seeking disposal of the writ petitions in light of
(2 of 3)
judgment in the case of Bharti Upadhayay v. State of Raj. & Ors.:
DBSAW No. 1122/2017, decided on 10.08.2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that
the issue raised in the present writ petitions is squarely covered
by the judgment in Bharti Upadhayay (supra).
Learned counsel for the respondents attempted to make
submissions that even as per Bharti Upadhayay (supra), the
petitioners are not entitled to the relief as the petitioners have
obtained 36% and 39% marks in their senior secondary
examination.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel
for the parties.
In the case of Bharti Upadhayay (supra), Division Bench of
this Court, inter alia, came to the following conclusion:-
"......................................In case, the Senior
Secondary Certificate of the appellant with
42.31% marks is rejected for appointment to the
post of Teacher, the very course of B.S.T.C., in
which she was granted admission on the basis of
the same Senior Secondary Certificate would be
rendered a mere piece of paper. It would be
highly discriminatory, unfair and unjust.
Accordingly, the present special appeal is
allowed. The Order dated 22.11.2017 passed by
the learned Single Judge is set aside. We direct
the respondents to consider the case of the
appellant for appointment on the post of Teacher
Grade-III after treating her as having obtained
the requisite qualifying marks in the Senior
Secondary Examination in case, she is otherwise
eligible. The needful be done within one month of
the receipt of certified copy of this order."
A perusal of the above would reveal that the Division Bench
was of the opinion that based on the marks obtained in senior
secondary certificate, the qualification of BSTC obtained by the
applicant could not be rendered a piece of paper and,
(3 of 3)
consequently, granted the relief. As such, the distinction sought to
be pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents, has no
substance.
Accordingly, the present petitions filed by the petitioners are
allowed in light of and with the similar directions as given in the
case of Bharti Upadhayay (supra).
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
77-PKS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
