Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1650 (RAJ)

Tulachh Singh Rathore v. State of Rajasthan

2004-11-09

SUNIL KUMAR GARG

body2004
JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition u/Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by, the petitioner against the respondents on 2.9.2003 with the prayer that by at appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to consider and take into account the marks obtained by the petitioner in his senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination for appointment on the post of Physical Teacher Grill. 2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is is follows: The respondent No. 2 Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner issued an advertisement Annex.1 dated 28.7.2003 inviting applications for lo recruitment to the post of Physical Teacher Gr. III and in pursuance of the said advertisement, the petitioner being eligible and qualified, applied for the said post of Physical Teacher Gr. III alongwith requisite documents within the stipulated time. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not taking into account the marks obtained by him in Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination and according to him, Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination is equivalent to the Senior Secondary (Academic) Examination and for that, he has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunita Sharma & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., JT 2001(10) SC 178 and also on the decision of this Court in Deep Chand v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2003(1) WLC (Raj.) 187 . Hence, this writ petition with the prayer as stated above. A reply to the writ petition was filed by the respondents and it was submitted by them that the uniform policy is being followed in the matter of marks and copy of the directions issued in this respect are placed on record as Annex.R/1 and so far as the case of the petitioner is concerned, it was submitted by the respondents that since the petitioner has not submitted full facts and in absence of any factual averments, the present writ petition is not maintainable. A rejoinder to the reply of the respondents was filed by the petitioner and alongwith the rejoinder, the petitioner has submitted the copies of the mark-sheet of Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination, 1996, mark sheet of Higher Secondary Bridge Course Examination, 1999, Physical Education Certificate Examination, 1998 and mark-sheet of B.A. Part-III Examination, 2000 and they are marked as Annexs. 4, 5, 6 & 7 respectively. 4, 5, 6 & 7 respectively. Apart from this, it was further submitted by the petitioner that he has also participated in the Inter University Judo All India Tournament held at Jiwaji University Gwalior from 20.12.2001 to 22.12.2001 and for that, he has produced the Games and Sports Proficiency Certificate Annex. 8 dated 22.12.2001. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and gone through the entire materials available on record. 4. In this case, there is no dispute on the point that the petitioner applied for the post of Physical Teacher Grill in pursuance of the advertisement Annex.1 issued by the respondent No. 2 Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. 5. There is also no dispute on the point that the petitioner has passed Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination, 1996 which is evident from Annex.4. 6. There is also no dispute on the point that the petitioner has also passed Higher Secondary Bridge Course Examination, 1999 which is evident from Annex.5. 7. There is also no dispute on the point that the marks obtained by the petitioner in Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination are not being considered by the respondents on the ground that the qualification of Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination is not equivalent to Senior Secondary (Academic). 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunita Sharma (supra) has held that the qualification of Senior Secondary (Vocational) is equivalent to Senior Secondary (Academic). 9. Thus, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunita Sharma (supra) where the qualification of Senior Secondary (Vocational) has been held to be equivalent to Senior Secondary (Academic), the action of the respondents in not considering the marks obtained by the petitioner in Senior Secondary (Vocational) on the ground that it was not equivalent to Senior Secondary (Academic) cannot be sustained and the petitioner is entitled to seek direction to the respondents to consider the marks obtained by the petitioner in the Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination treating that qualification equivalent to Senior Secondary so (Academic) and by doing so, in case the petitioner comes in the merit, he may be given appointment to the post of Physical Teacher Gr. III and this petition deserves to be allowed to that extent. 10. III and this petition deserves to be allowed to that extent. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed to the extent and in the manner that the respondents are directed to consider the marks obtained by the petitioner in the Senior Secondary (Vocational) Examination treating that qualification equivalent to Senior Secondary Academic) and by doing so, in case the petitioner comes in the merit, he s nay be given appointment to the post of Physical Teacher Gr. III. No order as 'o costs.Writ Petition Allowed As Above. *******