Manohar vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 937 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1504/2023

1. Manohar S/o Dau Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 11 Jaspali Road, Jalkha, Pipar City Tehsil And District Jodhpur (Raj.)

2. Manoj Kumar S/o Ramesh Kumar, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ward No 7, Vpo Mahiyanwali, Tehsil And District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.)

3. Ajay Kumar S/o Krishan Lal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ward No 5, Vpo Mahiyanwali, Tehsil And District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.)

4. Anil Kumar S/o Inder Kumarr, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vpo Kalana , Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)

5. Yougita D/o Ganpat Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Jajro Ki Dhani, Vpo Tankla, District Nagaur (Raj.)

6. Rakesh Kumar S/o Meer Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Khundiya Bass, Post Rampura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu (Raj.)

7. Ajay Singh S/o Rohitashv Kumar Yadav, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Gugariya, Post Basie, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar (Raj.)

8. Nagendra Pal Gurjar S/o Bharat Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Vaidpura, Post Pali Dang, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.)

9. Sonveer S/o Dinesh Chand, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Nangla Bartai, Post Sunari, Tehsil And District Bharatpur, (Raj.)

10. Pawan Kumar S/o Mani Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Chak 4 Lpm Mokamwala, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.)

11. Harendra Sharma S/o Ramniwas Sharma, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Mishro Ka Pura, Post Gajpura, Tehsil Bari, District Dhoplur (Raj.)

12. Prafull Kumar Samadhiya S/o Ramniwas Sharma, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Mishro Ka Pura, Post Gajpura, Tehsil Bari, District Dhoplur (Raj.)

13. Rajesh Kumar Sharma S/o Kunjbihari Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Teacher Colony, Post Kiri Bari, District Dhoplur (Raj.)

14. Vishnu Kumar S/o Hari Chand, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Teacher Colony, Post Kiri Bari, District Dhoplur (Raj.)

15. Anil Kumar S/o Surender Kumar, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No 7, Vpo Mahiyanwali, Tehsil And District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.)

16. Pardeep Choudhary S/o Devilal Choudhary, Aged About 23 Years, R/o House No 59,ward No 11,chodhariyo Ka Mohalla, Lalanawas Nathwaniya, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)

17. Gajendra Chotiya S/o Mahendra Chotiya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Jato Ki Hathai, Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur (Raj.)

18. Ankit Godara S/o Ram Prakash Godara, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Jato Ki Hathai, Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of

(2 of 4) [CW-1504/2023]

Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Principal Secretary Education Department (Elementary), Government Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Director Elementary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner.

4. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur (Raj), Office Address-

Agriculture Management Institution Campus Durgapura Jaipur (Raj) Through Its Chairman.

5. National Council For Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, Wing No.2, 1 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002, Through Its Secretary.

6. Rehabilitation Council Of India (Rci), Office Address- B-22 Qutub Institution Area New Delhi -110016 Through Its Secretary.

                                                                   ----Respondents



For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Sushil Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)             :     Mr. D.S. Beniwal




                       JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                       Order

24/01/2023

1.         The      petitioners       having      completed        graduation   and

diploma in Special Education, have approached this Court with the

case that they possess requisite educational qualification in light of

the communication dated 05.12.2006 (Annex.-8), issued by the

Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI), so also clause (6) of the

advertisement No.13/2022, dated 16.12.2022.

2. It is asserted by Mr. Sushil Bishnoi, learned counsel for

the petitioner that in the case of Special Teachers, the qualification

prescribed or conclusion drawn by the Rehabilitation Council of

India are binding irrespective of the educational qualification

prescribed by the NCTE.

3. Mr. Bishnoi invited Court's attention towards the

proceedings dated 21.07.2022 of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in

(3 of 4) [CW-1504/2023]

Writ Petition Civil No.132/2016 : Rajneesh Kumar Pandey Vs.

Union of India : 2021 and argued that in the above referred order

of the Supreme Court, the communication/notification issued by

the RCI has been treated to be a direction by Hon'ble the Supreme

Court and thus, the respondents cannot deny petitioners' rights to

be given appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III Level-II

Special Education, when the RCI has clarified that the Diploma

done by the petitioner is equivalent to CTT course.

4. Mr. D.S. Beniwal, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent - Selection Board, relied upon a Division Bench

judgment of this Court dated 14.12.2022 in Usha Kumari & Ors.

Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : D.B. Special Appeal Writ

No.149/2022 and submitted that the arguments advanced by the

learned counsel for the petitioners are not tenable in light of the

adjudication made by the Division Bench on the issue involved in

the present case.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the grant of

interim relief.

6. Prima facie, arguments of Mr. Beniwal appears to be

correct that the issue has been decided against the petitioners by

the Division Bench by its judgment dated 14.12.2022, but then, it

is to be noted that order dated 21.07.2022 of the Hon'ble the

Supreme Court does not appear to have been brought to the

notice of the Division Bench when the above referred case of Usha

Kumari (supra) was decided.

7. Issue notice to the respondents.

8. Mr. D.S. Beniwal accepts notice on behalf of the

respondent No.4.

(4 of 4) [CW-1504/2023]

9. Let notices returnable on 22.02.2023 be issued to the

remaining respondents.

10. Notices be filed in two sets, out of which one set be

given dasti to Mr. Bishnoi for effecting service through speed post.

11. Meanwhile, respondent Selection Board is directed to

permit the petitioners to file their online/offline forms, in case they

are submitted by 25.01.2023.

12. On the application form being submitted, the

respondent - Selection Board shall issue admit cards to the

petitioners and permit them to appear in the examinations as and

when held, however, their result shall not be declared without the

leave of the Court.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 399-Mak/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)