PRITI MEENA D/O RAMU LAL MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the advertisement dated 02.08.2013 an applicant should submit the proof of passing the requisite education qualification before the written examination held by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. The petitioner was pursuing the B.Ed. Examination at the time of filing the application form. The first examination for the post of School Lecturer (Commerce) was held on 12.07.2014. The last examination for the said recruitment examination was held on 27.09.2014. The result of the B.Ed examination was declared on 25.09.2014 and the petitioner submitted her certificate of B.Ed examination on 25.09.2014 i.e. before the last date of the recruitment examination. The result of the petitioner was declared and she was found in merit. However, the appointment order was not issued to her on account of the fact that she did not have the requisite qualification on the date of the examination when the examination for the post of School Lecturer (Commerce) commenced. It is contended that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the ratio of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Smt. Manju Chhaba v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition NO. 34/2015) decided on 10.09.2015 and said judgment has also been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer v. Smt. Manju Chhaba & Ors. (D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No. 127/2016) decided on 04.04.2016.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondents, although does not dispute that the matte is covered but opposed the same by submitting that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition almost after two years as the result was declared on 27.03.2015 and even the revised list was declared on 10.07.2015. The petitioner was informed on an application moved by her under the Right to Information Act on 29.07.2015 that her candidature was rejected on the ground of not having requisite qualification as on the date of the examination. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the respondents that the vacancies for the subsequent year have also been advertised meanwhile.

(3.) Heard.