PRAKASH CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as a Hindi Teacher vide order dated 23.8.1994 (Annexure P/3), but his services were terminated vide order dated 2.1.1995 (Annexure P/7) allegedly on the ground that he did not possess the requisite qualifications. Admittedly, the requisite qualifications for the post of Hindi Teacher are Prabhakar and O.T. in Hindi.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was not possessing the qualification of O.T. or its equivalent. It is further submitted that even if the petitioner is held to be possessing the qualification of O.T. he could not be given the post of Hindi Teacher as he does not possess qualification of O.T. in Hindi.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to Annexure P/2, by which the Government of Haryana has recognised the Degree of Shiksha Shastri of Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi, as equivalent to O.T. (Sanskrit) in Haryana. This court in Civil Writ Petition No.1642 of 1982 decided on December 7, 1983, has already held that the qualification of Prabhakar with O.T. without being O.T. in Hindi, is sufficient for the purposes of appointing a person as Teacher in Hindi. To the similar effect is the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.15397/1992, decided on May 2, 1993, wherein it has categorically been held that it was not necessary for a Hindi Teacher to have O.T. in Hindi. Once a person has Shastri or Prabhakar Degree and has sufficient knowledge of Hindi, O.T. in Hindi is not required. The impugned order has been passed on the ground that the law laid down in Civil Writ Petition No.15397/1992 was not not applicable in the case in hand as he was not a writ petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition. The law laid down by the Division Bench in so far as holding the qualification equivalent to O.T. in Hindi cannot be held to be in-personam. Respondents are not justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the basis of the aforesaid plea taken by them and their stand is against the dictum of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition. The petitioner, who possessed the requisite qualifications, could not be removed from service on the plea that he did not possess O.T Degree in Hindi. Accordingly the writ petition is allowed. Order Annexure P/7 impugned in the petition is quashed The petitioner shall also be entitled to all the consequential benefits.