Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nidhiraj Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 March, 2022
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3695/2022
Nidhiraj Sharma S/o Dinesh Dayal Sharma, Aged About 27
Years, Plot No. 2/119, Housing Board, Radhey Govind Mandir Ke
Piche, Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Education
Secretary, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hans Raj Nimbar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
28/03/2022
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking
direction to the respondents to consider the qualification of B.Com
of the petitioner as eligible and accord appointment to the
petitioner on the post of Special Teacher, Gr.III (Level-II), subject
Social Studies (M.R.).
It is inter alia indicated that pursuant to the advertisement
dated 31.7.2018 (Annex.1), the petitioner applied for the post of
Teacher Gr.III, Special Education, subject Social Studies (M.R.).
The petitioner was called for document verification on 28.12.201.
Whereafter, another list for document verification was issued on
12.1.2022 (Annex.8). On 21.2.2022 vide Annex.9, a list was
issued, whereby, the candidates were provisionally selected.
It is submitted that the petitioner has obtained marks higher
than the last candidate indicated in the list dated 21.2.2022, who
(2 of 3) [CW-3695/2022]
had obtained 56.390 marks, whereas the petitioner has obtained
59.800 marks, however, his name has not appeared in the said
list.
Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that as
the petitioner has done B.Com; based on the said aspect, he has
not been accorded appointment though the petitioner has
obtained marks higher than the cut-off, which action of the
respondents is contrary to the judgment in Priyanka Menaria v.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16664/2018,
decided on 11.4.2019 and, therefore, the respondents be directed
to include the name of the petitioner in the list of provisionally
selected candidates.
Learned AAG appearing for the respondents is not in a
position to dispute that the issue raised in the present petition is
squarely covered by judgment in the case of Priyanka Menaria
(supra) and that the name of the petitioner has not been included
in the list of the provisionally selected candidates on account of
the fact that the petitioner came from commerce stream.
In view of the above fact situation, wherein, the issue raised
in the petition is covered by order in the case of Priyanka Menaria
(supra), wherein, it was inter alia laid down by this Court as
under:-
"Consequently, the writ petition filed by the
petitioner is allowed. It is held that the petitioner, who
has studied Banking and Business Economics in her
graduation (B.Com) would be eligible for appointment
on the post of Teacher Gr.III (Level-II) in subject Social
Science.
The respondents would take steps for according
appointment to the petitioner, in case, the petitioner is
found otherwise eligible. The petitioner would be
entitled to all consequential benefits regarding her
(3 of 3) [CW-3695/2022]
seniority etc. However, monetary benefits would be
paid to the petitioner from the date of her
appointment.
Needful may be done by the respondents within
a period of four weeks from today."
Consequently, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed.
The respondents are directed to include the name of the petitioner
in the list of provisionally selected candidates issued on
21.2.2022, with all consequential procedure and benefits.
Needful may be done by the respondents within a period of
four weeks from today.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
64-Sumit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
