LUMBA RAM CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to direct the respondents to accept the application form of the petitioner, duly submitted on 25.7.2005, and to grant admission to the petitioner in the two years in service BSTC Correspondence Course, starting from 17.6.2005. The writ petition was fled on 24.8.2005, and vide order dated 26.8.2005, while issuing notice, it was ordered to be connected with few writ petitions, and by interim order, petitioner was granted provisional admission.

(2.) The facts are, that the petitioner alleges to have been appointed as Shiksha Sahayogi on 15.3.2000, vide Annex.1. While so working, a criminal case was registered against him, and thereupon the Senior Dy. District Education Officer, on 22.2.2001, issued an order (Annex.2), directing Sarpanch not to take the petitioner back on duty till finalisation of the criminal case. Accordingly, the Sarpanch issued the order dated 2.3.2001 (Annex.3), directing to hand over the charge, and that he will be taken back on duty as soon as the criminal case is decided.

(3.) The petitioner claims to be possessing academic qualifications of Secondary School Examination vide marksheet Annex.4, which shows that he passed the Secondary School Examination with Hindi, English and Mathematics subjects. Then vide Annex.5, he acquired the qualification of Senior Secondary in the year 1993, and did graduation vide Annex.6. The criminal case is said to have been decided in favour of the petitioner on 18.3.2005, vide Annex.7. The petitioner than moved application to the Block Elementary Education Officer on 11.4.2005, requesting to be taken back on duty, identical application was also sent to District Collector, Pali. However, the matter went on, and vide Annex.13, dated 16.7.2005, the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pali wrote to the Block Elementary Education Officer, to reinstate the petitioner, who in turn, wrote a letter to the Sarpanch on 20.7.2005, and Sarpanch reinstated the petitioner on 21.7.2005, and the petitioner joined on 22.7.2005. With these facts, it is alleged, that the State Government floated a scheme to train the untrained Shiksha Sahayogi/Shiksha Karmis, and other Para Teachers, who were appointed under various government schemes, and accordingly, a self financed correspondence course was introduced in the year 2002, and then again in 2005, vide Annex.18. According to the petitioner, the petitioner applied on 25.7.2005, for being given admission, as the acquittal was rendered on 18.3.2005, and despite the guidelines having been issued on 20.2.2005, and despite best efforts, the petitioner was not taken back on duty, and thus, immediately on being taken on duty, he moved the application. Thus, refusal to give admission is bad.