Pooja Jeenger vs Rajasthan Public Service ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 873 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13667/2020

Pooja Jeenger D/o Kishna Ram, Aged About 24 Years, In Front Of Railway Station, Baytu Bhopji, Bhopji Barmer Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan Public Service Comnmission, Through The Secretary. Secondary Education, Ajmer.

2. Secretary, Department Of Education Government Of Rajasthan Jaipur.

3. Director, Secondary Education, Directorate, Bikaner.

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. VLS Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Khet Singh


                      JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
                                      Order
13/01/2021

1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking

direction to the respondents to consider her candidature for the

post of Lecturer (School Education) in Subject Physics.

2. Petitioner's contention is that due to prevalent situation of

overall lockdown and spread of COVID-19, petitioner could not

complete M.Sc. by the due date fixed in the recruitment

notification. Since there was no fault of the petitioner, she be

allowed to take part in the selection process, as she has

completed the qualification now.

3. Mr. Khet Singh, learned counsel for the respondent -

Commission at the outset submits that the identical controversy in

relation to the same recruitment has been decided against the

petitioner, by this Court vide judgment dated 08.10.2020

(2 of 2) [CW-13667/2020]

rendered in the case of Vishwas Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.9552/2020).

4. This Court in the case of Vishwas Kumar (supra) has held as

under :

"It is not in dispute that even at the time of examination, conducted pursuant to the advertisement No.10/18 and at the time of declaration of result, the petitioners were not in possession of B.Ed Degree which is a qualification mentioned in the advertisement No.10/18. The RPSC has rejected the candidatures of the petitioners vide impugned order dated 09.09.2020 on the ground that they do not possess the requisite qualification. Being aggrieved with this, the petitioners have preferred this writ petition.

In view of the fact that even at the time of examination, conducted pursuant to the above advertisement and even at the time of declaration of result by the RPSC, the petitioners were not in possession of the B.Ed degree, which is required for the appointment on the post of School Lecturer (Agriculture), I do not find any illegality in the action of the respondent-RPSC in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner.

Hence, this writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed."

5. Following the enunciation made in the case of Vishwas

Kumar (supra), this Court does not find any substance in the

petitioner's contention.

6. The present writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.

7. Stay application is also dismissed.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 25-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)