Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1075 (RAJ)

Narayan Lal Meena v. State of Rajasthan

2003-07-30

H.R.PANWAR

body2003
JUDGMENT 1. - These writ petitions have been filed for quashing the order dated 20.6.2002 (Annx. 4) passed by the respondent No. 4 cancelling the training of the petitioners and also for quashing the judgment dated 24.3.2003 (Annx. 5) passed by the District Collector, Chittorgarh, by which the the learned District Collector dismissed the representations filed by the petitioners and affirmed the termination order dated 20.6.2002 (Annx. 4). Since, identical questions of law and facts are involved in these petitions, taking SBCWP No. 1749/2003 as the leading case, the same are being decided by this common judgment. 2. The facts and circumstance giving rise to these petitions are that to after qualifying 10 + 2 Examination, the petitioners obtained a degree of Bachelor of Physical Education (B.PEd.) from Nagpur University. In pursuance of the advertisement issued by the respondent No. 4 for appointment on the post of Para Teachers and Physical Education Teachers, the petitioners applied for the post of Physical Education Teacher. After is interview, they were found suitable for training and they attended the training course from 1.6.2002 to 20.6.2002. Abruptly, the respondent No. 4, vide impugned order Annex. 4 dated 20.6.2002, relied the petitioners from the training centre on the ground that they do not possess the requisite qualification for appointment on the post in question. Aggrieved of the impugned order Annx. 4, petitioners preferred SBCWP No. 2523/2002, 2524/2002 and 2521/2002, respectively, before this Court and this Court, vide order dated 20.1.2003, disposed of the same in terms of the judgment in SBCWP No. 2966/1999, Ram Kumar v. State of Rajasthan & ors. , decided by the Jaipur Bench of this Court on 26.8.2002 and directed the petitioners to file representations before the Collector. The petitioners filed representations before the learned Collector requesting him for providing them appointment as they were possession the requisite qualification required for appointment on the post of Physical Education Teachers. The learned Collector, vide impugned order dated 24.3.2003 (Annx. 5), disposed of their representations and directed the respondent No. 4 to consider the candidature of the petitioners as and when vacancies are advertised. Hence these writ petition. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. The learned Collector, vide impugned order dated 24.3.2003 (Annx. 5), disposed of their representations and directed the respondent No. 4 to consider the candidature of the petitioners as and when vacancies are advertised. Hence these writ petition. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents have not assigned any reason as how the petitioners did not possess the requisite qualification: the petitioners possess the requisite qualification as per the amended Notification dated 27.3.2002: the State Government issued an amended Notification dated 27.3.2002 (Annx. 3) whereby partial amendment was made in the earlier notifications No. 816 10 dated 30,4.2001 and 14.5.2001 by adding the qualification of Senior Secondary with D.PEd.. B.P.Ed. C.M.Ed. in the eligibility clause; all the petitioners are holding the three years course degree of Bachelor of Physical Education (B.PEd.) Degree; the respondents erred in holding that the Petitioners possess Three Years Degree Course instead of One Year's Degree Course and as such they erred in not considering the better degree course in more subjects obtained by them the as per the fresh Notification dated 5.8.2002 issued by the State Government, the B.P.Ed. Course done by the petitioner has been recognised and the said Notification over-rides all the earlier notifications: and as per the decisions of this Court also, the Three Years Decree of B.PEd. is a valid qualification for appointment on the post in question. Lastly, it has been contended that the learned Collector has erred in directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners as and when the vacancies are so advertised, 5. On the other hand. learned counsel for the respondents have supported the action of the respondents and the decisions taken by the impugned order Annx. 4 and Annx, 5. 6. Annx. 1 in all these cases are the Certificates issued by the Nagpur University which certify that the petitioners have obtained the Three Years Degree in Physical Education. Annexure. 3 is the Amended Notification dated 27.3.2002 issued by the State Government, by which the earlier Notifications No. 816 dated 30.4.2001 and 881 dated 14.5.2001 have been amended with immediate effect. Amended Notification Annx. 3 recognises the Degree of B.P.Ed. for appointment on the post of Education Assistants. The posts of Education Assistants and Physical Education Teachers are at par. 3 is the Amended Notification dated 27.3.2002 issued by the State Government, by which the earlier Notifications No. 816 dated 30.4.2001 and 881 dated 14.5.2001 have been amended with immediate effect. Amended Notification Annx. 3 recognises the Degree of B.P.Ed. for appointment on the post of Education Assistants. The posts of Education Assistants and Physical Education Teachers are at par. A as perusal of Annx. 1 in all the three writ petitions reveals that all the petitioners an holding the degrees of Bachelor of Physical Education (B.P.Ed.) issued by Nagpur University. 7. Thus, the only question arises for consideration is whether the Three Years Degree Course in B.P.Ed. is the requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Physical Education Teacher. In Ashok Kumar Sharma & others v. State of Rajasthan & ors., 2000 (1) WLC (Raj.) 152 , while considering the case for recruitment on the post of Physical Education Teachers. this court held that the Degree of B.P.Ed. carries higher qualification than Diploma and as such the holders of this Degree are entitled as to be considered for recruitment to such post. The Court further directed that the B.PEd. (Three Years Course) Degree obtained by the candidates from the recognised Universities, as recognised by the University Grants Commission be considered as degree of Graduation in Physical Education and all such persons shall be eligible for consideration for the said post along with other so candidates who possess the graduate degree or equivalent to the graduate degree and the diploma in Physical Education. 8. In State of Rajasthan & ors. v. Hari Ram & 16 others, 2001 (1) WLC (Raj.) 124 , the petitioners were holding the Bachelor's Degree in Physical Education from Nagpur University. The requisite qualification required for appointment on the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade II was s Graduation with Certificate of Physical Education or Secondary with four years Diploma in Physical Education. The petitioners were held to have possessed better qualification than the qualification prescribed for the post in question. The requisite qualification required for appointment on the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade II was s Graduation with Certificate of Physical Education or Secondary with four years Diploma in Physical Education. The petitioners were held to have possessed better qualification than the qualification prescribed for the post in question. The Hon'ble Division Bench, after considering the facts and circumstances of the Case, came to the conclusion that the qualification 10 mentioned in column No. 5 requires that the person for being recruited as PT.i. on direct recruitment basis snail be graduate with certificate in Physical Education or Secondary with four years diploma in Physical Education; petitioners had apprised the respondents that while pursuing the course of degree in Physical Education, they have undergone more theoretical studies and also more practical training in comparison to those persons who have acquired diploma in Physical Education. The petitioners have represented and apprised to the respondents that they are better qualified in comparison to those persons who have been treated eligible merely on possession of diploma in Physical Education. It is also urged that the persons who have acquired degree from the same Universities from where the petitioners have also acquired their case on the basis of such degree have been considered and they were held eligible for the post and have been provided appointment by the respondents in various regions and under such circumstances, the non-consideration of the applications made by the petitioners is discriminatory. 9. Thus, from the above discussion, it is clear that the petitioners have to their credit not only the requisite qualification from a recognised university but they possess the qualification better than the requisite qualification and as such they are entitled to be considered for appointment on the post in question. 10. Consequently, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners are allowed. The impugned orders Annx. 4 and Annx. 5 are quashed and set-aside and the respondents are directed to reconsider the cases of the petitioners for imparting training for the remaining period and if they are otherwise eligible 3s for appointment on the post in question, they may be given appointment. There shall be no order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******