(1.) THE 3rd respondent applied for the post of Assistant Teacher in Hindi. The 3rd respondent did not consider the candidature on the ground that Petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification. Aggrieved by the same the 3rd respondent filed Application before the Karnataka administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order at Annexure-A held that non-consideration of the case of the respondent is bad in law and directed the petitioners herein to consider his case for selection. The said order is challenged in this Writ Petition.
(2.) THE impugned order is challenged placing reliance upon the Note to Rule 66 of the Karnataka education Tribunal Services (Department of Public Instruction) (Recruitment) (Amendment)Rules, 2001. It is the case of the petitioners that respondent has not studied Kannada medium or language as first or second language and therefore he is not eligible for the post.
(3.) THE Administrative Tribunal considered the contention of the petitioners and rejected the same. The Tribunal referred to its earlier decision in similar case in NOORJAHAN v. STATE and ANR. Application Nos. 1799 and 1971/2002 disposed of on 12. 9. 2003. In both the cases the Tribunal set aside the order rejecting the order that applicant must have passed Kannada language as first or second language.