LADU RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal has been tiled by the appellant-petitioner against the dismissal of his writ petition by the learned Single Judge on 8/4/2011. The appellant-petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Sahyogi under the 'Rajiv Gandhi Swam Jayanti Pathshala Yojna". At the time of appointment, the eligibility qualification possessed by the petitioner i.e. 'Purva Madhyama' from Shree Brahd Gujarat Sanskrit Parishad was treated as equivalent to Secondary School Examination of the Secondary Board of Rajasthan, however, later on it was found that the said qualification from Gujarat was not recognised by the State of Rajasthan and, therefore, by the impugned order Annex. dt. 17.5.2008 the Chief Executive Officer cum District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Bikaner terminated the services of appellant-petitioner and being aggrieved by the same, the appellant-petitioner preferred the writ petition before this Court, which came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge inter alia on the ground that the said qualification of Purva Madhyama possessed by the him from 'Shree Brahd Gujarat Sanskrit Parishad' was not recognised by the State Government after 1978 and, therefore, he was ineligible to get the said appointment itself in the first instance in the year 1999.

(2.) Aggrieved by the said dismissal of the writ petition, the petitioner has come up in the present intra Court appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. R.S. Choudhary relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Pal & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors., 1987 AIR(SC) 2027 and submitted that since the said course was recognised by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, when the petitioner passed the said examination of 'Purva Madhyama' in the year 1977 vide Annex. 2 marks-sheet issued by the 'Shree Brahd Gujarat Sanskrit Parishad' again on 27.1.2011, a photo copy of which is produced before this Court, in which year 1977 is hand written, therefore, the appellant-petitioner's services could not have been terminated on the ground of ineligibility or subsequent derecognition of the qualification by the State Government after 1978.