SURAJMAL KATARA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions arise in identical circumstances, and involve common question of law, therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment. The petitioners seek direction in these writ petitions, to be given admission in the BSTC correspondence course, in pursuance of Annexure 9 and 10, so also to be allowed to continue to pursue the course, and after successfully passing the examination they may be issued the degree of BSTC course. It is also prayed, in the alternative, that if in future any BSTC correspondence course is conducted by any of the fresh advertisement, than the petitioners may be considered for giving them the BSTC training, through correspondence, on preferential basis. The fourth prayer made is, to reinstate the petitioners in the services of Shiksha Mitra, or on any equivalent post, and after passing the BSTC course, their services may be regularized.

(2.) At the beginning of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted, that he does not want to press relief no. 4 for reinstatement and regularization after passing BSTC. Thus, in substance the petitioner seeks a direction to be given admission in BSTC training course, pursuant to Annexure 9 and 10. It may also be observed here, that during course of arguments also, the whole stress was on this aspect only. Out of this bunch, in some of the writ petitions, show cause notices were issued, while some writ petitions have been admitted, in some matters, an interim order has been issued directing giving of provisional admission to the petitioner, with a rider, that, that will not create any right in favour of the petitioners. However, since the controversy involved is very short, and number of matters had arisen, vide order dt. 6.2.2006 all the matters were ordered to be listed together. It was understood, that at this stage itself, all the matters shall be finally decided, and with that understanding arguments were made in the cases that were listed on 20.3.2006 and 22.3.2006, Accordingly those writ petitions had been finally heard and judgment was reserved.

(3.) However before the judgment could be pronounced, the remaining matters also came to be listed, and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties requested that those cases (detailed in the Schedule-A) may also be decided on the same lines, and along with the above twenty cases, and therefore the matters detailed in the Schedule- A, are also being decided, by this judgment.