KULDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The clinching issue arises in the instant batch of civil writ petitions revolves around the fact that petitioner(s) could not acquire the requisite educational qualification for the post of Lecturer-School Education in different subjects upto the cut off date i.e. the date of holding the written competitive examination as per the essential condition envisaged in the advertisement itself, yet petitioner(s) has come up with a case that he/she had appeared in the examination of final year of the requisite educational qualification held by the university concerned before the date of competitive examination, however due to the delay/negligence in declaring the result of the requisite qualification on the part of the concerned university, subsequent to the date of conducting the competitive examination, wherein the petitioner(s) has passed the final year examination, and since the delay in declaring the result of final year of the requsite education qualification is not attributable to the petitioner(s) but it is on the part of university concerned, therefore, the candidature of petitioner(s) be considered on merit for appointment on the post of Lecturer-School Education in respective subjects treating him as having acquire the requisite educational qualification. Few of writ petitioners have filed writ petitions before rejection of the candidature by the RPSC and few others have filed writ petitions after rejection of candidature by the RPSC only on the ground of not acquiring the requisite educational qualification for the post in question before or upto the date of conducting the written competitive examination and hence, all writ petitioners are jointly aggrieved by nonconsideration of their candidature on merits for appointment on the post in question. The relevant condition as envisaged in the advertisement issued by the RPSC and which is in conformity to the proviso appended to Rule 17 of the Recruitment Rules of 2021, reads as under:-

(2.) Since facts in all writ petitions are substantially similar and legal point involved therein is identical in nature, therefore, with consent of learned counsel for both parties, all writ petitions were tagged and have been heard together. Accordingly, all writ petitions would stand decide by this common judgment.

(3.) In order to deal with the issue in question, facts are taken from SBCWP NO.5773/2023 (Kuldeep Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.) as also from SBCWP NO.17689/2022 (Amit Jangu Vs. State of Rajasthan).