Love Raj Yadav vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 8618 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13038/2018

Love Raj Yadav S/o Shri Raja Ram Yadav, Aged About 29 Years, 2470 Yadav Bhawan, Teli Pada Choda Rasta, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchyati Raj, Secretariat, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Zila Parishad, Jodhpur Through Its Chief Executive Officer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishanpal Singh Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kunal Upadhyay for Mr. Sunil Beniwal

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

04/07/2022

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in the

present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment passed

in Pritam Kumar Tak Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.

Civil Writ Petition No.14481/2012 decided on 26.08.2014 at

Jaipur Bench.

Counsel for the respondents does not refute the fact that the

issue as raised in the present writ petition rests decided by Pritam

Kumar Tak's case. It has further been informed that the ratio as

laid down in Pritam Kumar Tak's case (supra) has been affirmed

by the Division Bench in State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Pritam

Kumar Tak ; D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.1037/2016 decided on

23.05.2017.

(2 of 2) [CW-13038/2018]

In Pritam Kumar Tak's case, it was directed as under:

"In view of above, there can be no doubt that the qualification as held by petitioner, which is recognized by Rehabilitation Council of India, is valid for the purpose for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III Special Education Level (I) Primary.

In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the Diploma of the petitioner as valid for the purpose of appointment and pass appropriate order of appointment of the petitioner if he is found suitable, within two moths from the date copy of this order is produced before them. His appointment would relate to the date of appointment of candidate as per the selection in question. However, for the intervening period, he shall be entitled for notional benefits only."

In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is

allowed in the same terms as in the case of Pritam Kumar Tak

(supra) subject to the availability of vacant posts.

(REKHA BORANA),J 34-T.Singh, Abhishek/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)