Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mamraj Parihar vs Raj. State Road Trans. Corpn. And ... on 25 April, 2022
Bench: Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 869/2015
Mamraj Parihar
----Petitioner
Versus
Raj. State Road Trans. Corporation. And Ors
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shardul Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Purohit
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
25/04/2022
The present petition has been filed aggrieved of the order
dated 12.11.2014 (Annexure-17) passed by the respondent
Department whereby the representation of the petitioner for
consideration of his candidature for appointment to the post of
Driver was rejected.
The petitioner is alleged to have acquired the qualification of
Prathama Pariksha conducted by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan,
Allahabad. It is averred that the said qualification of Prathama is
equivalent to Secondary qualification of the Board of Secondary
Education, Rajasthan. It has therefore been contended that the
qualification of Prathama being equivalent to Secondary
qualification, the petitioner should be held to be qualified for the
post of Driver.
The condition for appointment to the post of Driver
prescribed in the advertisement dated 06.08.2013 was as under:
(2 of 3) [CW-869/2015]
pkyd 1- ekU;rk izkIr ek/;fed f"k{kk cksMZ ls lSds.Mjh ijh{kk mrh.kZ
2- Hkkjh okgu pykus dk ykbZlsUl o cSt
3- Hkkjh okgu pykus dk 3 o'kZ dk vuqHko
A bare perusal of the said condition clarifies that a candidate
ought to have a qualification of Secondary from a recognized Board
of Secondary Education. In the present case, the petitioner had
acquired the qualification of Prathama from Hindi Sahitya
Sammelanm, Allahabad and as held in the case of State Bank of
India vs. Nand Ram reported in 1995 (3) WLC 61, the Hindi
Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag, Allahabad is not a University as
established under the statute nor it is a 'deemed University' as
established under Section 3 of the Universities Grant Commission
Act, 1986.
In the said judgment while relying upon the earlier judgment
passed in State of Rajasthan and Ors. vs. Shiv Koran and
Ors. reported in WLR 1993 Raj. 367 the Division Bench of this
Court held as under:-
"10. In: the State of Rajasthan and Anr. v.
Shiv Karon and Ors. WLR 1993 Raj. 367, the
question of equivalence of prathma qua the
Secondary school examination/Matriculation
again came-up for consideration before the
Division Bench of this Court. In that case,
the State Government recognised Prathma
examination equivalent to Maticulation
Examination and that recognition was later
on withdrawn by the state Government. The
Court, therefore, held that "by Notification
dated 13.5.74 the Government of Rajasthan
recognised Prathma of Hindi Sahitiya
Sammellan, Allahabad as equivalent to that
of high School/ Matriculation. Subsequently
vide notification dated 28.6.85 the said
qualification has been derecognised. The
Notification dated 28.6.85 was not
retrospective in effect. It did not effect the
equivalence which was earlier granted by the
(3 of 3) [CW-869/2015]
notification dated 13.5.74". This judgment of
the Division Bench is not applicable so far as
the present controversy is concerned
because in the case of the State of Rajasthan
v. Shiv Koran, Rule 12(2) itself required that
the candidate must possess Hindi or Sanskrit
qualification recognised by the Government
as equivalent to Maticulation and Prathma
Examination was recognised as equivalent to
Maticulation in to and not for Hindi Standard
only. This judgment is, therefore, of no
assistance to the respondent."
In view of the specific finding by the Division Bench of this
Court that the University of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag,
Alllahabad is not a recognized University and the qualification of
Prathama, the course conducted by the said University, being not
from a recognized University, the present petitioner can also not
be held to be entitled to any relief by this Court.
In view of the ratio as laid down in State Bank of India vs.
Nand Ram (supra) and State of Rajasthan and Ors. vs. Shiv
Koran and Ors. (supra) and in view of the observations made
above, the present petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.
All pending applications also stand dismissed.
(REKHA BORANA),J
Ashutosh-7
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
