Rajasthan High Court
Sarvan Kumar Raigar vs State Education Departmentors on 26 July, 2022
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15130/2013
Sarvan Kumar Raigar son of Shri Kana Ram Raigar, aged about
39 years, resident of Village & Post Anoppura, Via Kaladera,
Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through the Principal Secretary,
Government Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its
Secretary, Googhara Gati, Ajmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Parihar on behalf of Mr.
Tanveer Ahamad
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Zakawat Ali, AGC
Mr. Ashish Kishore Saksena
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
26/07/2022
Application for early listing is allowed.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers;
"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that
your Lordship may graciously be
pleased to accept and allow this writ
petition and by an appropriate writ,
order or direction:-
1. The cancellation of the appointment
of the petitioner under the revised
result may be held to be arbitrary and
illegal and the respondents may kindly
be directed to consider the candidature
of the humble petitioner on the post of
PTI Grade-III and the qualification of
Bachelor of Physical Education i.e. 3
years course may kindly be considered
as sufficient and requisite qualification
(2 of 4) [CW-15130/2013]
for the post of PTI Grade-III and
accordingly the petitioner may kindly be
ordered to be given appointment on the
aforesaid post with all consequential
benefits in view of the merit position
No. 1198 of the petitioner in the
interest of justice.
2. Any other appropriate order,
which may be found just and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the
case, be passed in favour of the
petitioner.
3. Cost of the writ petition may also
be awarded in favour of the petitioner."
In pursuance to the advertisement dated 14.12.2011 the
petitioner applied for the post of PTI Grade-III and after
participating in the selection process, the candidature of the
petitioner was rejected by the respondent(s) on the ground that
the petitioner was not having the requisite educational
qualification as mentioned in the advertisement. The educational
qualification prescribed for the post of PTI Grade-III in Clause-
7(2)(1) has been held as under;
"Bachelor of Physical Education (B.P.E.D) or
Certificate in Physical Education (C.P.E.D) or
Diploma in Physical Education (D.P.E.D.)
recognised by the National Council for Teacher
Education (राष्ट्रीय अअधयापक क शपक शिशिका पषा पररपक शिद िशद दरारा
मानयता पारापत पक शिारट्रीषा पररक क शपक शिशिका मि ा में सषातक (बबी पबी एड)
या पक शिारट्रीषा पररक क शपक शिशिका मि पमाण पत्र (सबी.पबी.एड.) या
पक शिारट्रीरक क शपक शिशिका मि डडरापडिप्लोमा (डबी.पबी.एड)"
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
having B.P.E qualification which is equivalent to the qualification of
B.P.E.D. as prescribed in the advertisement.
Counsel for the respondent-RPSC filed reply to the writ
petition and according to Para No. 2 of the reply the petitioner is
not having the requisite educational qualification as prescribed in
the advertisement. Para No.2 of the reply has been reproduced as
under;
(3 of 4) [CW-15130/2013]
"That the petitioner is possessing B.P.E.
degree on the date of examination, which is
not requisite recognized qualification neither
by the NCTE nor by the State of Rajasthan
whereas B.P.E.D is recognized qualification,
therefore, petitioner was not having requisite
qualification as per advertisement and Rules,
hence petitioner has been informed vide
letter dated 02.08.2013 and the provisional
selection on the post of PTI Gr. III has rightly
been cancelled by answering respondent, as
such this writ petition is liable to be
dismissed summarily. Copy of letter dated
02.08.2013 will be kept ready for kind
perusal of the Hon'ble Court at the time of
hearing."
Counsel for the respondent(s) submits that the qualification
of the petitioner has been considered in view of the notification
issued by the Government of Rajasthan dated 09.12.2011
whereby the qualification for the post has been prescribed as
B.P.E.D/C.P.E.D. and D.P.E.D.
In support of the contention, counsel for the respondent(s)
relied on the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court
in the matter of Manoj Kumar Verma Vs. Rajasthan Public
Service Commission (D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 601/2014)
decided on 22.08.2014 wherein Para-18 it has been held as
under;
"In the present case, on the enforcement
of the NCTE Regulations, 2001, prescribing
qualification for teachers including Physical
Education Teachers, the Rules of 1971
framed by the State of Rajasthan were
required to be amended. The Schedule in
the NCTE Regulations, 2001, quoted as
above, does not prescribe B.P.E. as
qualification for PTI Grade-II and Grade-III
for teaching in schools/high schools and
Senior Secondary Schools, where physical
education is an elective subject. For
Secondary/High Schools, Graduates with
Bachelor of Physical Education (B.P.Ed.), or
its equivalent, is the requisite qualification.
The appellant possesses B.P.E., which is a
degree course in Physical Education. He did
(4 of 4) [CW-15130/2013]
not pursue the degree course in Physical
Education (B.P.Ed.) after doing graduation.
He, therefore, does not hold the requisite
qualification for appointment as PTI Grade-
II or even PTI Grade-III. His contention
that he had taken admission in B.P.E.
course in1994 and passed out in 1997,
does not hold him eligible, as he was
seeking recruitment in the schools in
Rajasthan in pursuance of the
advertisement issued, after the NCTE
Regulations, 2001 came into force."
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be
dismissed for the reasons; firstly, the petitioner is not having the
requisite educational qualification as mentioned in the
advertisement for the post in question; secondly, in view of the
judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter
of Manoj Kumar Verma (supra), no case is made out for
interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India.
In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is
dismissed.
Interim order stands vacated.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
CHETNA BEHRANI /44
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
