Asha Ram Gurjar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 14531 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 14531 Raj
Judgement Date : 29 October, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Asha Ram Gurjar vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 29 October, 2025

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:46663-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 389/2023

Asha Ram Gurjar, Aged About 33 Years, Pathik Nagar Ii, Tehsil
Bijoliya, Distt. Bhilwara, (Raj.).
                                                                       ----Appellant
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
         Elementary Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
2.       The   Director,      Department           Of     Elementary     Education,
         Bikaner.
3.       The District Education Officer, Department Of Elementary
         Education, Bundi Rajasthan.
4.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, District Bundi
         (Raj.).
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)             :     Mr. Manoj Bhandari, Sr. Advocate
                                   assisted by Mr. Sushil Bishnoi and Mr.
                                   Aniket Tater
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Ayush Gehlot for Mr. Rajesh
                                   Panwar, AAG



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI

Order

29/10/2025

Learned counsel for the parties submit that the controversy

is no longer res integra and stands squarely covered by the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manoj Kumar

Sharma & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (Civil Appeal

No. 8140/2024, decided on 24.09.2025) of which para 10 and

14 reads as under:-

(Uploaded on 03/11/2025 at 05:04:38 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:46663-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-389/2023]

"10. The short issue arising for consideration is whether the qualification of the appellants who possess a B.Ed.(General Education) along with a post-graduate professional diploma in Special Education, is equivalent to the prescribed qualification, i.e., graduation and B.Ed. (Special Education).

14. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that there is no difficulty for the State Government in considering the case of the appellants who possess a B.Ed. (General Education) along with a one-year Post Graduate Professional Diploma in Special Education (PG PD-SE) as equivalent to the prescribed qualification in the advertisement."

In light of the joint submission, the present appeal is also

disposed of in the same terms.

The impugned order dated 29.03.2023 passed by the learned

Single Judge in SBCWP No.10691/2021 is hereby set aside. The

respondents shall accordingly confirm all benefits to the appellant,

including reinstatement. The benefits for the period during which

the appellant did not discharge his duties shall be treated as

notional.

(ANUROOP SINGHI),J (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

33-Taruna/-

(Uploaded on 03/11/2025 at 05:04:38 PM)