Jay Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 5359 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4797/2022

1. Jay Singh S/o Shri Mahavir Prasad, aged about 38 Years, R/o Village Bijarniya Ki Dhani (Gudha Bawani), Post Gudha Gorji, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan.

2. Pratap Singh Dagar S/o Shri Onkar Mal Dagar, aged about 50 Years, R/o VPO Makro, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

3. Jaipal Singh Dangi S/o Shri Prahlad Ray, aged about 38 Years, R/o Village Dhana, Post Khetri Nagar, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

4. Kanwar Singh S/o Shri Dalip Singh, aged about 38 Years, R/o Village Kushalpura, Po Jakhod, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

5. Ajay Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Birdi Chand Yadav, aged about 35 Years, R/o Village Kansli, Post Kansli, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

6. Ajeet Singh Rathore S/o Shri Shiv Pal Singh Rathore, aged about 39 Years, R/o P 46, Jaikarnilok, Gokul Pura, Jhotwara, Jaipur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

7. Bhag Chand S/o Shri Bholu Ram Jat, aged about 41 Years, R/o VPO Sali, Tehsil Dudu District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

8. Shiv Raj Choudhary S/o Shri Rang Lal Choudhary, aged about 37 Years, R/o Village Ganeshpura, Post Khudiyala, Tehsil Mauzmabad, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

9. Surendra Kumar S/o Shri Bhola Ram, aged about 37 Years, R/o Vill Post Dalelpura, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

10. Mukhram Yadav S/o Shri Madan Lal Yadav, aged about 38 Years, R/o Vill Mandha, Post Rajnota, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

11. Bachchu Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Pukhraj Gurjar, aged about 48 Years, R/o 16 A, Bhuneshwari Vatika, 80 Feet Bajri Mandi Road, Panchyawala, Jaipur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

(2 of 3) [CW-4797/2022]

12. Maharam Rawat S/o Shri Ram Karan Rawat, aged about 39 Years, R/o VPO Chimanpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jhunjhunu.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jaipur.

5. District Education Officer (Elementary), Jhunjhunu.

6. District Education Officer (Elementary), Jaipur.

                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. M.L. Deora.
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Deepak Chandak on behalf of
                                   Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG.



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                        Order

11/04/2022

The application (1/2022) preferred on behalf of petitioners

for early listing is allowed.

The matter is taken for admission.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the

issue as raised in the writ petitions is covered by judgment in

Mahendra Kumar Vishnoi v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. : SBCWP

No.5420/2014, decided on 10.08.2015 (Annex.9), which judgment

has been upheld by the Division Bench (Annex.10).

Learned AAG made submissions that in another judgment,

arising out of appointment under the Sanskrit Education

Department, similar view as in the case of Mahendra Kumar

(3 of 3) [CW-4797/2022]

Vishnoi (supra) was taken, which was upheld by the Division

Bench in State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Sahi Ram : DBSAW

No.311/2019, decided on 01.08.2019, against which the State has

preferred Special Leave Petition, which is pending consideration

before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and parties have been directed

to maintain status quo.

In the circumstances of the case, wherein two Division Bench

judgments have held in favour of the petitioners, however, the

matter is pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme

Court, the matter requires consideration.

Issue notice.

As Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG puts in appearance on behalf of

the respondents, no need to issue notice to the respondents.

In the meanwhile, the respondents are directed to consider

the candidature of the petitioners for the post of Teacher Gr.III

(Level-I) by taking their qualification of Diploma in Teaching (JBT)

as a valid qualification for the post in question and in case, the

petitioners ultimately fall in merit, while they may not be

accorded appointment, the seats will be kept vacant to the extent

the petitioners are found within merit / cut-off.

It is expected of the State to get the matter expedited before

the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

The stay applications stand disposed of.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 206-DJ/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)