(1.) The matter has been heard with the consent of learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. There is no complaint about any audio and visual quality.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are required to be referred herein which reads as hereunder:-
(3.) Mr. Uday Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellantwrit petitioner has submitted that the writ Court has not appreciated the fact that the Village Level Committee has selected the writ petitioner twice taking into consideration his qualification and his place of resident and after finding him more meritorious in comparison to other candidates, he has been selected vide its meeting dated 02.07.2007 but the appointment letter has not been issued and again a meeting was conducted on 23.09.2007, in which, again the decision taken by the Committee on 02.07.2007 has been reiterated by finding the writ petitioner fit for selection as Para Teacher but instead of issuing appointment letter, the Committee has recommended the respondent no.7 to be appointed as Para Teacher mainly on the ground that the writ petitioner has got "Alim Degree" which is equivalent to graduate treating him to be the teacher of Urdu Subject, without appreciating the fact that while taking the "Alim Degree", he has also studied Hindi, Economics, English as a compulsory subject along with History as optional subject, in which he has found to be qualified and hence, the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge that since the writ petitioner has obtained "Alim Degree" and since there is no post of Urdu Teacher, it would not be appropriate for selection of Urdu Teacher in the said School, is contrary to the factual situation since herein the writ petitioner although has got "Alim Degree" but along with other subjects, he has also been found to be qualified, hence, it cannot be construed that since the writ petitioner has obtained "Alim Degree", he could only be able to teach Urdu subject, is absolutely incorrect finding of the learned Single Judge.