Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MAHESH KUMAR YADAV versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MAHESH KUMAR YADAV v THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS - CW Case No. 1660 of 1999 [2006] RD-RJ 3226 (15 December 2006)

//1//

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORDER

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1660/1999

MAHESH KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

Date: 15.12.2006.

HON'BLE MR. K.S. RATHORE, J.

Ms. Shashi Sharma for

Mr. Rajendra Soni for the petitioner.

Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Addl. GA for the State.

****

The short controversy in this writ petition is that the petitioner applied for P.T.I. Grade-III but was not found eligible as the degree awarded by the

Nagpur University is not recognised, although the petitioner's name appeared at S.No.2 in the provisional list of OBC category.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1665/1999- Smt. Mamta Vs. State of Raj. & Ors., dated 28.09.2001, wherein this Court directed the respondents to consider the matter of the eligibility of the petitioner for the appointment on the post of PTI Gr.II in the light of the decision passed in S.B.C.W.

Petition No. 1630/97, dated 28.09.2001. //2//

I have considered the rival submissions of the respective parties and carefully perused the judgment placed before me.

The facts of the case are that the advertisement was issued in the year 1998 for the post of PTI Grade-III and pursuant to the advertisement the petitioner applied for the post and the merit list was prepared. It is not disputed that the petitioner was not given appointment on the ground that the degree obtained by the petitioner from Nagpur University is not recognised and is not valid for employment under the provisions of Section 17(4) of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993. It is also not disputed that now the Nagpur University has got recognition from the National Council for Teachers

Education and degree awarded by such University has been treated as valid qualification for giving appointment.

Thus, in the light of the observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforementioned case of Smt. Mamta (supra) and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner's name find place at S.No.2 in the OBC category, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of //3//

PTI Grade-III as per the provisions of law if any post is still lying vacant pursuant to the advertisement issued on 10.08.98 and the petitioner is otherwise found eligible to be given appointment on the said post considering the fact that the degree obtained by the petitioner is valid for appointment.

With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.