Banshidhar Saini vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 19411 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 295/2020

Banshidhar Saini S/o Lekhu Ram Saini, Aged About 59 Years, Chandra Lakha Bhawan, Ward No.17, Post Sujangarh District Churu (Raj.) Presently Residing At Janu Khari Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu (Raj.)

----Appellant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.

2. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Churu.

3. B.e.e.o., Panchayat Samiti Rajgarh Churu.

4. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Girish Sankhala
For Respondent(s)         :     -



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

                                    Judgment

20/12/2021

The instant intra court appeal (writ) has been preferred

by the writ petitioner Banshidhar Saini seeking to assail the order

dated 14.12.2019 passed by the learned Single Bench of this court

dismissing the review petition preferred by the petitioner seeking

review of the judgment/order dated 02.04.2013.

We have heard and considered the arguments

advanced by Mr. Sankhala, learned counsel representing the

appellant, and have gone through the order under challenge as

well as the material placed on record.

(2 of 3) [SAW-295/2020]

By filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3996/2007 in this

court, the petitioner tried to assail the order passed by the

recruiting authority rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for

appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III. After hearing the

arguments advanced by Mr. Sankhala and upon going through the

order under challenge, it is apparent that the petitioner was

possessing the degree of Shiksha Visharad procured from the

Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 2002-03 claiming

that the same was equivalent to B.Ed.. The petitioner claimed

that many more candidates having a similar degree have been

afforded appointment in the questioned recruitment process.

Be that as it may. After going through the order under

challenge and the material placed on record, we find that

indisputably the degree of Shiksha Visharad, which the petitioner

possesses, is not a valid degree in view of the letter dated

27.02.2001 (Annex.8) annexed with the writ petition, as per

which, the National Council For Teacher Education has clarified

that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad does not conduct any

course for Teachers Training.

In this background, it is apparent that there is no merit

in the contention of Mr. Sankhala that the degree, which the

petitioner claims to possess, can be termed to be equivalent to

B.Ed. making the appellant qualified for the purpose of

appointment to the post of Teacher Grade-III. The contention of

Mr. Sankhala that similarly situated persons have been afforded

appointment in the same recruitment process does not convince

us for a moment to grant the relief sought for to the appellant

because illegality committed, if at all, by the respondents cannot

be treated to be a ground to extend the benefit of parity to the

(3 of 3) [SAW-295/2020]

appellant because Article 14 of the Constitution of India does not

countenance grant of relief on the basis of patently illegal action.

Iillegality once committed cannot be perpetuated forever. The

order under challenge ex facie does not suffer from any infirmity

or illegality warranting interference therein.

As a consequence, we find no merit in this appeal,

which is dismissed as such.

No order as to costs.

                                   (SAMEER JAIN),J                                        (SANDEEP MEHTA),J


                                    10-Pramod/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)