AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in
Deepak Bariya v. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 5166/2015, decided on 26.05.2017, which judgment has been
upheld by Division Bench in State of Rajasthan & Anr. v. Deepak Bariya : D.B.S.A.W. No. 598/2018, decided on 04.04.2018, against which, Special
Leave Petition has also been rejected by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in view of the stipulation in the advertisement.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.
A perusal of the record indicates that the petitioner has done his Post Graduation i.e. M.A in Hindi.
In the case of Deepak Bariya (supra) this Court, inter alia, laid down as under:-
“Thus, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner not only had the requisite subject in his Graduation but the requirement that the said subject of
English should have been offered as his optional subject in Graduation cannot be insisted upon in view of the petitioner having cleared his Post
Graduation in the subject of English. The petitioner thus, has higher qualification as prescribed for the post for the purpose of teaching upto Secondary
Level.â€
The Division Bench while rejecting the appeal observed as under:-
“1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
Issue which arises for consideration is whether a candidate who opts for a subject as a compulsory subject in graduation Course would be ineligible
in terms of the qualification prescribed by the appellant which states that the candidate should have cleared a Graduation Degree in the concerned
subject with English as an optional Subject.
The respondents have a graduation degree which shows that he had chosen English as a compulsory paper in the First, Second and Third Year of
the three years Graduation Course.
It is trite that a rule has to be applied meaningfully and practically. The reason behind a rule needs to be ascertained to give meaning to a Rule.
As is known to one and all a person who clears Bachelor of Arts, Graduation Examination can opt for various disciplines such as History,
Geography, Political Science, Social Science, English, Hindi, Psychology etc.
The University has given option to the candidates to opt for compulsory and optional Subject. The reason is a person desirous of acquiring better
knowledge, to say History and Political Science, opts for the two as compulsory Subject and for others as optional subject.
The idea behind the rule in question framed by the appellant is to ensure that the candidate concerned has adequate knowledge in the Subject for
which the candidate offers candidature to be appointed as a Teacher.
Since the respondent have opted for English as a compulsory subject in the graduation Course, the object of the rules is satisfied. Thus, we find no
infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. The impugned order dated 26.05.2017 is upheld.
The writ petition is dismissed in limine.â€
(emphasis supplied)
In view of the above fact situation, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by judgment in the case of Deepak Bariya (supra) and, consequently,
the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. Respondents are directed to treat the petitioner, who has done her Graduation with subject Hindi as
eligible for Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) for subject Hindi and deal with her candidature pursuant to the advertisement dated 31.07.2018 appropriately
and if she stands in merit, grant her appointment in accordance with her merit.
Needful may be done by the respondents within a period of three weeks.