Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 158 (JK)

Rajinder Parsad v. State Of J. &K.

2002-05-16

S.K.GUPTA, T.S.DOABIA

body2002
1. Writ petitioner was preferred by two petitioners. This stands dismissed. The present appeal has been preferred by one of the writ petitioner. The other petitioner has got relief from the State. This aspect has a bearing on this case. This would be adverted to again. 2. The two petitioners came to be selected. Their names figured in the select list. They were at serial No.25 and 27. They were not offered appointment. This was on the plea that B.Ed. Degree obtained by them was not recognised by the State Government. 3. Taking note of the above factors, the merit position was analysed. It was observed that if the marks obtained in the B.Ed, degrees, which was not duly recognised are not taken into consideration on, then the two writ petitioners would not be entitled to any relief. It was further observed that their marks would be less than the marks obtained by the candidate who was last of all in the general category. As indicated above only one writ petitioner has filed this appeal. 4. Learned Counsel for this appellant place reliance on an order issued on 10th November, 2001. This order has been retained on the file as Annexure-c-1. a perusal of the above order reveals that so as writ petitioner, Om-Parkash is concerned, he has since been issued a letter of appointment. This is apparent from Annexure C-l. As such the reasoning which prevailed with the State in issuing letter or appointment in favour of Om Parkash would apply to the case of Rajinder Parsad also. If Rajinder Parsad has obtained B.Ed, degree from the same University, which is not said to be duly recognised and if benefit could be given to Om Parkash then why the present appellant is not entitled to the same relief is not understandable. 5. This appeal is accordingly disposed with a direction that the claims of the appellant be considered on the same lines as was done in the case of Om Parkash. There appears to be no justifiable reason to deny relief to the appellant. Let the issue be reconsidered and settled within a period of two months from the date, a copy of this order is made available by the appellant to the respondents counsel who have put appearance today. A copy of this writ petition be also made available to the respondents counsel. Let the issue be reconsidered and settled within a period of two months from the date, a copy of this order is made available by the appellant to the respondents counsel who have put appearance today. A copy of this writ petition be also made available to the respondents counsel. Copy of order C-l passed in favour of Om Parkash be also made, available. 6. Disposed of as such.