Rajasthan High Court
Anita Agarwal vs State And Ors on 17 January, 2023
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2826/2007
Anita Agarwal W/o Late Shri Rajesh Agarwal, D/o Rameshwar
Das, aged 38 years, Resident of A-50, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur Distt.
Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through it's Principal Secretary,
Education Department, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. The Director, Sanskrit Education, Directorate, Shiksha Sankul,
JLN Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The Joint Director, Sanskrit Education, Directorate, Shiksha
Sankul, JLN Marg, Jaipur (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Neel
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.K. Sharma, Addl. GC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
17/01/2023
Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayer:
"It is therefore humbly prayed that your lordships
may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this
writ petition and respondents may kindly be
directed
i) that they give appointment to the petitioner on
the post of Teacher (Grade-II) English, as per
advertisement No.1/2003-04.
ii) that the letter dated 22.02.2007 (Annex-7) and
letter dated 02.03.2007 (Annex-8) may also be
quashed and set-aside.
(2 of 5) [CW-2826/2007]
iii) that respondents be directed to give all the
consequential benefits and other relief, which your
honour may please to pass in favour of the
petitioner.
iv) that cost of the litigation may also be awarded
in favour of the petitioner."
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was holding English as a compulsory subject in her graduation and
on the basis of that qualification, she applied for appointment on
the post of Teacher (Grade-II) English in pursuance to the
Advertisement issued by the respondents. Counsel submits that
the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected by the
respondents on the ground that she was not possessing English as
an optional subject in her graduation. Counsel submits that at the
relevant time there was no such mandate under the Rajasthan
Sanskrit Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1978 (for short 'the
Rules of 1978') that the candidate must possess English as
optional subject for getting appointment on the Post of Teacher
(Grade-II) English. Counsel submits that the impugned condition
mentioned in the advertisement was contrary to the Rules of
1978. Counsel further submits that even otherwise also the
petitioner was having English as a compulsory subject in her
graduation and in similar circumstances, the controversy involved
in this matter has been set at rest by the Division Bench of this
Court in the case of State of Rajasthan and anr. vs. Deepak
Bariya and Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal (writ) No.598/2018)
decided on 04.04.2018. Counsel submits that said judgment
was not challenged by the State authorities before the Hon'ble
Apex Court and the same has attained finality. Counsel submits
(3 of 5) [CW-2826/2007]
that under these circumstances, appropriate directions be issued
to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for
appointment on the post of Teacher (Grade-II) English.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents
opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner and
submitted that as per the terms and conditions, the candidate was
required to possess English as an optional subject in her
graduation and the petitioner is not having the requisite
qualification and her candidature was rightly rejected by the
authority and the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief from
this Court.
Heard and considered the rival submissions made at
Bar and perused the material available on the record.
This fact is not in dispute that the advertisement was
advertised in consonance with the Rules of 1978. Bare reading of
Rules of 1978 clearly indicates that there was no such condition
that the candidate must possess English as an optional subject in
her graduation. For ready reference the relevant schedule
attached to the Rules of 1978 is reproduced as under:
SCHEDULE
Sr. Name of Method of Minimum Post or Minimum Maxim
No the Post recruitment Academic posts Qualification and um
with qualification from experience for age -
percentage and experience which promotion limit
for direct promoti for
recruitment on is to direct
be recruit
made ment
GROUP 'C' JUNIOR SCALE
1. Sub. 50% by Trained IIIrd Graduate or 28
Dy.Inspect promotion and Graduate or Grade Shastri or years
or/IInd 50% by direct Trained Shastri Teacher equivalent
Grade recruitment or equivalent . Examination with
Teacher. qualifications Degree or
Diploma in
Education or
Shiksha Shastri
(4 of 5) [CW-2826/2007]
Bare perusal of the above schedule clearly indicates
that the Rules of 1978 are silent in this regard and the terms and
conditions of the advertisement were contrary to the Rules of
1978. Even otherwise also the Division Bench of this Court has
decided the similar controversy in the case of Deepak Bariya
(supra) as under:
"1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
2. Issue which arises for consideration is whether
a candidate who opts for a subject as a compulsory
subject in graduation Course would be ineligible in
terms of the qualification prescribed by the appellant
which states that the candidate should have cleared a
Graduation Degree in the concerned subject with
English as an optional Subject.
3. The respondents have a graduation degree
which shows that he had chosen English as a
compulsory paper in the First, Second and Third Year
of the three years Graduation Course.
4. It is trite that a rule has to be applied meaningfully
and practically. The reason behind a rule needs to be
ascertained to give meaning to a Rule.
5. As is known to one and all a person who clears
Bachelor of Arts, Graduation Examination can opt for
various disciplines such as History, Geography,
Political Science, Social Science, English, Hindi,
Psychology etc.
6. The University has given option to the candidates
to opt for compulsory and optional Subject. The
reason is a person desirous of acquiring better
knowledge, to say History and Political Science, opts
for the two as compulsory Subject and for others as
optional subject.
7. The idea behind the rule in question framed by the
appellant is to ensure that the candidate concerned
(5 of 5) [CW-2826/2007]
has adequate knowledge in the Subject for which the
candidate offers candidature to be appointed as a
Teacher.
8. Since the respondent have opted for English as a
compulsory subject in the graduation Course, the
object of the rules is satisfied. Thus, we find no
infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single
Judge. The impugned order dated 26.05.2017 is
upheld.
9. The writ appeal is dismissed in limine."
Since the petitioner was having English as a compulsory
subject in her graduation and on the basis of said qualification,
she has participated in the process of selection and her
candidature has been rejected on the technical grounds which are
not tenable as per the Schedule attached to the Rules of 1978 and
as per the judgment of the Division Bench in the case of Deepak
Bariya (supra).
Instant petition is disposed of with directions to the
respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for her
appointment on the post of Teacher (Grade-II) English (if she is in
merit and otherwise eligible) within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
KuD/6
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
