Suman Beniwal vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3563 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1803/2018 Suman Beniwal Daughter Of Sh. Sanwat Singh, Wife Of Sh. Vipin Kumar Rahar, Resident Of Ghanghu, Tehsil And District Churu Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Secretarit, Jaipur Rajasthan

2. Director, State Medical And Family Welfare Institute, Zhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur Raj..

3. The Additional Director Administration, Medical And Health Services, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.

4. Board Of Secondary Education, Ajmer. Through Its Secretary.

5. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Churu.

6. Chief Medical And Health Officer., Nagaur.

7. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bikaner.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.R. Choudhary. For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order 08/03/2022

Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit puts in appearance on behalf of the

respondents, copy of the petition has been served on him.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in the

present writ petition is squarely covered by order of this Court in

Usha vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.2251/2020 decided on 11.02.2022, wherein in identical

circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner therein was

allowed and therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner may also

be allowed.

Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the

fact that the issue raised in the present writ petition is similar to

that in the case of Usha (supra).

(2 of 2) [CW-1803/2018]

In this case of Usha (supra), this Court referring to Division

Bench judgment in State of Rajasthan vs. Ms. Firdos Tarannum &

Anr : D.B. Special Appeal (W) No.534/2005, decided on

12.01.2022, inter-alia came to the following conclusion and

directed as under: -

"A perusal of the above would reveal that the Division Bench has held that the qualification of Adeeb obtained from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh is equivalent to High School.

Further, as the equivalence was withdrawn by the Board of Secondary Education in the year 2011, the withdrawal would be prospective only.

In the present case, the petitioner has passed Adeeb in the year 2010 and as such, in view of the judgment in the case of Ms. Firdos Tarannum (supra), she is eligible.

Learned counsel for the respondents though does not dispute the fact that the issue raised is covered by the judgment in the case of Ms. Firdos Tarannum (supra), however, submits that the State is in the process of questioning the validity of the said order before Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition.

Be it as it may, the issue raised is squarely covered by Division Bench judgment in the case of Ms. Firdos Tarannum (supra).

Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to declare the result of the petitioner and in case, the petitioner stands in merit, accord her appointment as per her merit, if she is otherwise eligible.

The petitioner would be entitled to all consequential benefits w.e.f. the date, person lower in merit to the petitioner was accorded appointment, however, the petitioner would be entitled to monetary benefits from the date, appointment is accorded to the petitioner."

In view of above fact situation, the petition filed by the

petitioner is allowed with similar directions as given in the case of

Usha (supra).

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 166-pradeep/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)