Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dhapu vs State Of Rajasthan on 11 January, 2021
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1607/2020
Dhapu D/o Ummeda Ram W/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 27 Years,
R/o Pokar Bhadu Ki Dhani, Nokh, Tehsil And District Barmer,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Health Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director, State Medical And Family Welfare Institute,
Zhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur (Raj.).
3. The Additional Director (Administration), Medical And
Health Services, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
4. Board Of Secondary Education, Ajmer, Through Its
Secretary.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Karwasra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
11/01/2021
1. The controversy involved in this writ petition is as to whether
the qualification of Adeeb is equivalent to Secondary Examination
of Board of Secondary Education, Ajmer, Rajasthan.
2. Issue involved and raised in the present writ petition has
already been decided by this Court vide judgment dated
29.08.2017 in the matter of Chandra Kiran Meena Vs, State of
Rajasthan & Anr. in SBCWP No.9992/2017 whereby this Court has
held as under :-
"A perusal of both judgments aforesaid
reveals that this Court has, in no ambiguous
terms, held that the aforesaid courses, namely,
(2 of 4) [CW-1607/2020]
Adeeb & Adeeb-e-Mahir from Jania Urdu, Aligarh,
have been de-recognized by the State of
Rajasthan in 1991 and in light thereof, the
candidates having these educational
qualifications are not entitled to seek
employment. This Court has expressed its
anguish and concern that despite repeated
determination and consistent view, the efforts
are being made to seek indulgence for such
courses.
The argument of the petitioner that since
the matter, regarding recognition/de-recognition,
is pending consideration before the Larger Bench
of this Court, the petitioner should be extended
indulgence, cannot be countenanced at this
state, particularly when, there are two direct
judgments, as aforesaid, rendered by this Court,
that the educational qualifications of Adeeb &
Adeeb-e-Mahir from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh are not
recognized by the State of Rajasthan."
3. Mr. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents submitted
that Larger Bench of this Court has disposed of the reference vide
order dated 20.02.2020, as having been rendered infructuous.
4. A perusal of the order reveals that the same has been done
in light of order dated 25.10.2018 passed by Hon'ble the Supreme
Court in Civil Appeal Nos.10721-107222 of 2018 (Arising out
of SLP (c) Nos. 14573-14574 of 2012, titled as Jamia Urdu
Aligarh Etc. versus The State of Rajasthan and others; the
said order of the Larger Bench in DB Civil Reference No.2/2020 in
DB Civil Writ Petition No.3248/2013 reads as under :-
"Now during the pendency of the reference, order
dated 25.10.2018 has been passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.10721-107222 of
2018 (Arising out of SLP (c) Nos. 14573-14574 of
2012, titled as Jamia Urdu Aligarh Etc. versus The
State of Rajasthan and others, arising out of Firdos
(3 of 4) [CW-1607/2020]
Tarannum's case (supra) and the said order reads as
under :-
"1. Leave granted.
2. Having heard learned counsel on both sides,
we find that it is undisputed that the appellant-
institution was not heard before the impugned
judgment was passed, Even so, the appellant's
degrees have been held to be invalid on the
ground that there is no sanction to the existence
of the apellant's institution itself.
3. On the short ground that the appellant-
institution was not heard, we consider it
appropriate to set aside the impugned judgment
and order and remit the matter back to the High
Court for a fresh decision in accordance with law
after hearing the appellant-institution. The High
Court may decide the matter as expeditiously as
possible, preferably not later than one year.
4. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
Thus, the situation now emerges is, that at
present, the Division Bench judgment of this Court in
Firdos Tarannum's case (supra) has been set aside.
Thus, at this stage, there are no two
different/divergent views/decisions given by this Court,
which would require consideration by a Larger Bench.
Thus, the reference at this stage is rendered
infructuous. Hence, the reference is returned as having
been rendered infructuous."
5. It is therefore clear that the issue at hand is now pending
consideration before the Division Bench of this Court.
(4 of 4) [CW-1607/2020]
6. In considered opinion of this Court, when there are two
direct judgments of Coordinate Benches, holding that the
Educational qualification of Adeeb and Adeeb-e-Mahir from
January are not recognized by the State of Rajasthan, there is no
point in keeping this petition pending.
7. In light of the aforesaid and following judgment dated
29.08.2017 being SBCWP No.9992/2017 rendered in case of
Chandra Kiran Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., this writ
petition is also dismissed.
8. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
11-Rahul/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
