PURNIMA RANI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these writ petitions involve identical questions of law and facts and, therefore, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, they are being heard and decided by a common order.

(2.) IN both these writ petitions, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to consider their case for the post of Senior Teacher according to their merit and to issue the appointment orders.

(3.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to SBCWP No.2981/2005 filed by petitioners Smt. Bhawana and Smt. Annu Singla are that petitioner Smt. Bhawana is having the qualifications of M.A., B.Ed. and petitioner Smt. Annu Singla is having the qualifications of B.A., B.Ed. Petitioner Smt. Bhawna passed B.A. examinations from Punjab University, Chandigarh with the subjects English, Punjabi and Punjabi (Optional), while petitioner Smt. Annu Singla passed her B.A. examination with English, Punjabi and Economics. The respondent No.2 invited applications for the recruitment on 101 posts of Senior Teachers in Science, Maths, English and Physical Teacher. The petitioners were called for interview on 19.08.2003 but their name was not included in the office order dt. 20.04.2005, by which the respondents provided appointments to 53 male and 16 female teacher and thereby filled up only 69 posts out of 101 posts advertised by them. Hence this writ petition.