Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Rao Sulochana Kumari ... on 27 February, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:11400-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 922/2019
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education
Department Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, Raj.
3. Chief Executive Officer, Chittorgarh, Zila Parishad,
Chittorgarh, Raj.
----Appellants
Versus
Rao Sulochana Kumari W/o Late Shri Deependra Singh Rajora,
Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of House No. 389, Ganesh Nagar,
Rawatbhata District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Deepak Chandak
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Order
27/02/2025
1. Learned counsel for the appellant-State fairly submits that
the issue raised in the present appeal is no more res integra and
the same has been decided by this Court in D.B. Special Appeal
Writ No. 1373/2019 (State of Rajasthan & Ors Vs. Gaya Shri) on
04.09.2021.
2. Order passed in the case of Gaya Shri (supra) reads as
under:-
"1. This intra-Court appeal is directed against the
order dated 26.11.18 passed by this Court, whereby
the writ petition preferred by the appellant
challenging the action of the respondents in not
considering her candidature for recruitment to the
post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) in subject Hindi,
[2025:RJ-JD:11400-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-922/2019]
has been allowed, while relying upon a Bench
decision of this Court in State of Rajasthan & Anr. v.
Deepak Bariya : D.B.S.A.W. No.598/18, decided on
4.4.18.
It is noticed that as per the advertisement, the
eligibility qualification prescribed for appointment on
the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) in subject
Hindi was as follows :
"B fgUnh d s v/;kid d s fy; s] vH;FkhZ dks oSdfYid fo'k; d s :i esa
fgUnh fo'k; d s lkFk Lukrd ;k lerqY; ijh{kk mRrh.kZ fd;k gqvk gk suk pkfg,
vkSj vkosfnr fo'k; lfgr jhV@vkjVsV 60 izfr"kr vadk s d s lkFk mRrh.kZ fd;k
gqvk gk suk pkfg,A"
The candidature of the appellant is not
considered only for the reason that she has studied
optional subject Hindi in two years of the graduation
course and not for three years. It is pertinent to
note that as per the advertisement, the candidate
having qualification of graduation with optional
subject Hindi or equivalent qualification is eligible to
be considered for appointment on the said post.
Drawing the attention of this Court to the
graduation certificate issued by the Allahabad
University, learned counsel for the respondent
submitted that in Allahabad University in first and
second year of the course, three optional subjects
are permitted and in third year, only two optional
subjects are permitted.
It is not disputed that the appellant had
optional subject Hindi in two years as per the
curriculum provided by the Allahabad University.
The eligibility qualification prescribed does not
envisage that a candidate must have relevant
optional subject in all the three years of course of
studies. We cannot read something in the eligibility
qualification prescribed, which is not there and
therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the
order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge,
which is passed following a Bench decision of this
court.
The intra-Court appeal is, therefore,
dismissed."
3. In light of the statement made by learned counsel for the
state and the aforesaid judgment, the present appeal is also
dismissed.
[2025:RJ-JD:11400-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-922/2019]
4. Other than the disability in question, the State shall be free
to examine the other disability and eligibility.
5. Stay petition also stands dismissed.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
18-Ramesh Goyal, PS/Minki/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
