Shambhu Lal Meena @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan

Learned counsel for the parties agree that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Ramesh Chandra Katara. Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13881/2017, decided on 22.11.2017, the judgment reads as under :-

“1. Petitioners have come to the court with a prayer that the ineligibility of the petitioners Mr. Rup Lal Katara, Mr. Som Singh and Mr. Ramesh

Chandar Katara resulting into their disqualification vide Annexure-12 may be set aside. Since, the issue involved in all these writ petitions is common,

the same has been heard together.

The petitioner Rup Lal Katara has secured 39.85% marks in senior secondary. The petitioner Som Singh has secured 38.46% marks in senior

secondary. The petitioner Ramesh Chandra Katara has secured 40.20% marks in senior secondary.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the notification issued by the NCTE, which is Annexure-10 dated 29.07.2011, which provides for

minimum qualification.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the minimum qualification point No. 1(i)(a), the relevant portion, reads as under :-

“Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 45 % marks and 2 year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known), in

accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure),

Regulations, 2002â€​

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further shown the reservation policy in clause (ii), which reads as under :-

“Relaxation up to 5% in the qualifying marks shall be allowed to the candidates belonging to reserved categories, such as SC/ST/OBC/PH.â€​

Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the rule 266 Sub-rule 3, which reads as under :-

““Rule 266.………………..

(1)..…………………….

(2) …………………….

(3) Primary and upper PrimarySchool Teacher (100% by direct recruitment)

(a) General Education Level â€

(I) Classes I to V Qualifications as laid down by National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) under the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section

23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Central Act No.35 of 2009) from time to time.

Level-(ii) Classes VI to VIII Qualifications as laid down by National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) under the provisions of sub-section (1)

of Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Central Act No.35 of 2009) from time to time.

(b) Special Education Level-(i) Classes I to V Qualifications as laid down by National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) under the provisions of

sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Central Act No.35 of 2009) from time to time.

Level-(ii) Classes VI to VIII Qualifications as laid down by National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) under the provisions of sub-section (1)

of Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Central Act No.35 of 2009) from time to time.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, thus, states that as per Rule 266 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996, the notification issued on

29.07.2011 in exercise of power conferred under subsection 1 of Secton 23 of Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 is the

law of land and thus, the requirement in senior secondary is 45% marks and relaxation up to 5% may be permissible in the reservation policy as per

the same notification.

Learned Additional Advocate General states that if such 5% relaxation is given then the petitioner Rup Lal Katara is having secured 39.85% marks

and petitioner Shri Som Singh is having secured only 38.46% marks, therefore, even after 5% relaxation, they shall not qualify. Regarding the

Petitioner Shri Ramesh Chandra Katara, learned Additional Advocate General states that condition No.7 of the advertisement stipulates that 50%Â

passing marks are required in the senior secondary and therefore, 5 % relaxation shall be allowed to the candidates belonging to the reserved

categories.

After hearing counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 and Rule 266 Sub-rule 3 prescribed for

qualification stipulates that qualification is to be in accordance with the NCTE notification made under Section 23 of Right of Children to free and

Compulsory Education Act 2009. This Court is also of the opinion that once the legislature in its wisdom has decided that the notification issued by

NCTE by virtue of exercise the powers conferred under Subsection 1 of Section 23 of Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act 2009

shall be the rule then the same shall be binding upon selection process to be made under the Rules. Thus, the law of the land operating on this date, is

the notification dated 29.07.2011 for the purpose of prescribing qualification and reservation policy. The qualification apparently includes senior

secondary with at least 45% marks. Reservation policy while applying such qualification provides for relaxation of 5% to SC/ST/OBC and PH.

In light of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition of Rup Lal Katara ( writ petition No.13882/2017) and writ petition of Som Singh (Writ Petition

No.13880/2017) are dismissed as even after availing 5% relaxation meant for the ST candidates, they do not have the minimum eligibility of 40% in

Senor Secondary. However, the writ petition of Ramesh Chandra Katara (Writ Petition No. 13881/2017) on the same analogy is allowed as he has

secured 40.20 marks and upon relaxation of 5% marks in the minimum 45% marks as per notification dated 29.07.2011 and as per the Rule 266 of

Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996, the petitioner Ramesh Chandra Katara is entitled for appointment on the post in question. While quashing the

Annexure-12 qua Ramesh Chandra Katara (Writ Petition No.13881/2017), this Court directs the respondents to re-consider the candidature of

petitioner Ramesh Chandra Katara accordingly and grant him appointment if he is otherwise eligible. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.â€​

In light of the aforementioned submission, the writ petition is also allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in

terms of aforesaid precedent law within a period of 30 days from today and pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law.