Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hemant Singh Choudhary And Ors vs State And Anr. ... on 2 September, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023:RJ-JD:27765]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2774/2018
1. Hemant Singh Choudhary S/o Madaram, R/o Mahiyasar
Tehsil Degana District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
2. Ramji Lal Bhardwaj S/o Motilal, R/o Ronsi, Nadouli,
Karauli, Rajasthan.
3. Karamveer Dudi S/o Nagar Singh Dudi, R/o Kulod Khurd,
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
4. Mohit Kumar Sharma S/o Vijay Shankar Sharma, R/o
Khati Mohalla Tehsil Bonli, Peepalda, Sawai Madhopur,
Rajasthan.
5. Yogesh Kumar Muwal S/o Govind Ram Muwal, R/o Ward
No.04, Muwalo Ki Dhani, Ladpura, Sikar, Rajasthan.
6. Aniruddh Sharma S/o Khem Raj Sharma, R/o C-224,
Siddharth Nagar, Gatour, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
7. Hemant Kumar S/o Ramesh Kumar, R/o Nangali Ojha,
Alwar District Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary,
Department Of Personnel And Training, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Punia
Ms. Akshiti Singhvi for Mr. Sandeep
Shah, AAG
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
02/09/2023
1. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioners.
[2023:RJ-JD:27765] (2 of 3) [CW-2774/2018]
2. A perusal of Para Nos. 21 and 22 of the writ petition shows
that the petitioners have raised a grievance qua action of the
respondent - Commission who has considered the Degree of
B.Tech to be equivalent to RSCIT.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the
identical controversy came up before the Jaipur Bench of this
Court and vide judgment dated 29.05.2018 rendered in the case
of Gajendra Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No. 4043/2018), this Court has repelled such
contention of the petitioner in relation to the same recruitment
process.
4. Para 34 of the judgment in the case of Gajendra Singh
(supra) reads thus:
"34. From the factual matrix as obtaining in the
case at hand and applying the principles
deducible from the opinions referred to and
relied upon by the counsel for the parties; it
can safely be concluded that the candidates
with B.Tech. Qualification, or candidates in
possession of qualifications equivalent or
higher, would be deemed to fulfill the lower
qualification prescribed for the post. But that
qualification has to be in the same channel.
However, this rule could be subjected to
exception where the prescription of a particular
qualification is found to be irrelevant for
discharging the functions of that post and at
the same time, government is able to
demonstrate that for want of said qualification,
a candidate may not be suitable for the post,
even if he is in possession of "better
[2023:RJ-JD:27765] (3 of 3) [CW-2774/2018]
qualification" but that "better qualification" has
no relevance with the functions attached to the
posts.(vide Deep Chand Tiwari And Anr.)."
5. Following the judgment dated 29.05.2018 passed in the case
of Gajendra Singh (supra), the present writ petition is dismissed.
6. Stay application also stands dismissed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
127-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
