JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner Sumitra in writ petition No. 1988/97 is widow of late Shri Sahi Ram whereas the petitioner Suman Mishra in writ petition 452/97 as per her pleading she is said to be a divorced lady. Both the writ petitions are against non-consideration of their cases against reserved quota of widow/divorced lady for recruitment on the post of Teacher Gr. III with the prayer that the respondents be directed to consider the case of petitioners by giving relaxation of recruitment which has been amended in the year 1995. The petitioner Suman Mishra has also stated that she was on the merit list at Sr. No. 4. 2. The petitioner Smt. Sumitra had passed Secondary Examination in the year 1987 with subjects Hindi, English, Maths, Civics, History, as per annexure-1. She passed her Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1989 with subjects Hindi, English, Civics, History and Advance Hindi. She was married to Sahi Ram, who expired on 3.6.1996. 3. The petitioner Smt. Suman possess the qualification of Secondary Examination having passed in the year 1986 from Alwar School. She passed Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1987 from Alwar. She has also passed Ist year and IInd year TDC in the year 1988-90. She was married in the year 1993 with one Naresh Kumar but was divorced on 19.9.1995 by a decree of divorce. 4. On 6.10.1996 an advertisement was published for recruitment to the post of Teacher Gr. III. The photo copy advertisement has been annexed with the writ petition of Smt. Suman as Annexure-4. The petitioner appeared in the interview on 16.10.1996. The petitioner Suman Mishra is said to be on merit as well. It is the contention of petitioners that despite having been placed on the merits list, they have been ignored for appointment on the ground that in view of amendment made in the Rules i.e. in the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 on 25.8.1995, minimum qualification required for recruitment has been prescribed as Senior Secondary Examination with Hindi, English, Maths subjects. The petitioners were not holding the certificate of Senior Secondary Examination but weste holding the certificate of Higher Secondary Examination. It is the case of petitioners that at the time when the petitioners had passed Higher Secondary Examination, the highest school qualification as prescribed was Higher Secondary. The petitioners were not holding the certificate of Senior Secondary Examination but weste holding the certificate of Higher Secondary Examination. It is the case of petitioners that at the time when the petitioners had passed Higher Secondary Examination, the highest school qualification as prescribed was Higher Secondary. However, later on, the pattern of education had been changed whereas (whereby ?) the Higher Secondary was totally abolished and in its place a candidate was required to pass Senior Secondary Examination. It is the further contention of petitioner that by amendment of Rules, 1971 on 25.8.1995 all those candidates who had passed Higher Secondary Examination are not being considered as equivalent to Senior Secondary Examination. As a matter of fact, a class discrimination has been made to the prejudice of all those candidates who were holding the certificate of Higher Secondary Examination. Hence a prayer has been made that for the said post of teacher, a candidate who had passed Higher Secondary Examination, at the time when Senior Secondary Examination was not at all in existence, should not be discriminated and they should be considered along with the candidates who have passed Senior Secondary Examination. It is further submitted that before the said amendment of 25.8.1995 the qualification of Higher Secondary was highest qualification in School. A further prayer has been made that in Panchayat Department, where the teachers are similarly recruited, even after amendment the qualification is prescribed as Senior Secondary/Higher Secondary Examination. The petitioner had also quoted the circumstances, wherein in similar circumstances the relaxation has been allowed in the case of Mithlesh Kumari. A reference has been invited to the letter dated 1.12.1995 (Ann.9) wherein relaxation has been provided by the Director, Primary and Secondary Education with regard to the candidates who had passed the STC in the year 1994-95 or taken admission in STC course. It is a fact that the persons who have passed STC and are holding the certificate of Higher Secondary or Secondary Examination are being considered for the said post. It is the case of petitioners that the candidates who had passed Higher Secondary Examination cannot be expected to pass Senior Secondary Examination now or to restart the study and thus for all times they have been deprived to hold the post of Teacher Gr. III because of the amendment. 5. A written statement has been filed. It is the case of petitioners that the candidates who had passed Higher Secondary Examination cannot be expected to pass Senior Secondary Examination now or to restart the study and thus for all times they have been deprived to hold the post of Teacher Gr. III because of the amendment. 5. A written statement has been filed. The facts stated in writ petition are not denied. However, it is stated that in view of the amendment dated 25.8.1995 a candidate was required to possess the Senior Secondary Examination along with the Higher Secondary Examination Certificate having five subjects or which three should have been Hindi, English, Maths and for the reason that the petitioners could not be considered. It was further admitted that relaxation had been given to one Mithlesh Kumari and in all probability that relaxation was likely to be withdrawn. It is admitted that those candidates who have appeared in examination for STC course for the year 1994-95 cannot be disqualified even as they do not possess qualification of Senior Secondary Examination. To the contention as raised in para No. 10 of the Writ Petition No. 1988/97, the teachers are being recruited by Panchayat Department with the same qualification as are being held by petitioners, there is no denial. 6. Here it is the case where the earlier qualification of Higher Secondary Examination with Secondary Examination were totally abolished from the course of School and in place of Higher Secondary, Senior Secondary Examination was introduced in the year 1989-90. The Government has prescribed Senior Secondary Examination as minimum qualification, what should be the fate of those persons who have passed Higher Secondary Examination when Senior Secondary Examination had not been introduced at all. Are they to be debarred from public appointment ? What should be the fate of such candidates who had passed Higher Secondary Examination before introduction of Senior Secondary Examination. There is no doubt that after introduction of Senior Secondary Examination, the Government could incorporate in the Rules in minimum qualification to be Senior Secondary Examination in place of earlier incorporation as Higher Secondary Examination with Secondary Examination. What should be the fate of such candidates who had passed Higher Secondary Examination before introduction of Senior Secondary Examination. There is no doubt that after introduction of Senior Secondary Examination, the Government could incorporate in the Rules in minimum qualification to be Senior Secondary Examination in place of earlier incorporation as Higher Secondary Examination with Secondary Examination. Will the action of Government in totally debarring those persons who had passed Higher Secondary Examination shall not be a step to have debarred them for appointments of teachers with no fault of theirs as Senior Secondary Examination was not at all available to them at the time when they had passed Higher Secondary Examination. Earlier before the amendment and before introduction of Senior Secondary Examination in School, the highest qualification in School was Higher Secondary Examination. It is also admitted that this very qualification Secondary Examination with Higher Secondary Examination is still the qualification for the teacher candidates who had passed or had appeared in STC course in 1994-95. 7. Counsel for respondents relies on a judgment 1997(12) RLR 271, Smt. Sunita Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and another, which was a case where in the Secondary Examination the subject of Maths was required as essential subject in Secondary Examination and a contention was made that the requirement of subject 'Maths' for the post of Physical Training Inspector was not relevant and on this ground the amendment itself was challenged. The contention in regard to provision of subject Mathematics was not accepted by learned Single Judge. 8. However, in the present case the counsel for petitioner states that after the year 1990, there was no Higher Secondary Education available and prior to the prior to the year 1990 there was no Senior Secondary Examination available. The petitioner could not have passed Senior Secondary Examination in the year 1986-87, when admittedly the Senior Secondary Examination was substituted in place of Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1989-90. Apart from this, it is not denied that for the similar recruitment on the post of Teachers Gr. III in Panchayat Department, being governed under the similar Rules, the qualification is still prescribed as Senior Secondary Examination/Higher Secondary Examination with the necessary subjects. Apart from this, it is not denied that for the similar recruitment on the post of Teachers Gr. III in Panchayat Department, being governed under the similar Rules, the qualification is still prescribed as Senior Secondary Examination/Higher Secondary Examination with the necessary subjects. To my mind, it is the case where the petitioners are being placed in such a situation that they could not have acquired the certificate of Senior Secondary Examination at the time in the year 1986 or 1987, as such the qualification which was prevalent at the time when the petitioners acquired highest qualification of School, should have been considered to be equal to Senior Secondary Examination. The petitioners shall be entitled for consideration of their cases in the light of above said observations and it shall be appropriate for the Government to consider the case of petitioners for equalising the Higher Secondary Examination, passed by candidates before introduction of Senior Secondary Examination, as the minimum qualification required for recruitment on the post of Teacher Grade III in the manner as it has been done by the Government in regard to recruitment on the Teacher Gr. III in Panchayat Department and also in regard the teachers who have obtained the certificate of STC course in the year 1994-95.In view of the above observations, the writ petitions are allowed. No order as to cost.Petitions allowed. *******