Dismissed

Santosh Yadav v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Jul 2010LPA/803/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal against a Single Judge's order dismissing a petitioner's appointment as a Hindi teacher for lacking prescribed qualifications. The High Court held the appellant failed to meet necessary criteria and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed. The appellant is not entitled to appointment as the Single Judge's finding on qualifications was correct.

Santosh Yadav Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

LPA No. 803 of 2010 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

LPA No. 803 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision 15 .7.2010

Santosh Yadav

... Appellant

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶9

... Respondents.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL

¶11

Present: Mr. R.s.Sanghwan ,Advocate for the appellant

¶12

1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶13

2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?

¶14

M.M.KUMAR, J.

¶15

The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgement dated 18.7.2007 rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 12418 of 2001. The learned Single Judge has recorded a categorical finding that the appellant did not possess minimum qualification for appointment to the post of Hindi teacher. It has come on record that as per advertisement Nos. 3/99 dated 14.11.1999, 15.11.1999 as amended on 30.11.1999, the appellant was required to have following qualifications:

¶16

“i) Matric from Haryana School Education Board or an equivalent qualification recognized by the Haryana School Education Board.

¶17

ii) Prabhakar/B.A.(Hons.) in Hindi) from a recognized University.

¶18

Iii) LTG/OT in Hindi conducted by the Haryana Education

¶19

LPA No. 803 of 2010 (O&M)

¶20

¶21

Department or an equivalent qualification recognized by the Haryana Education Department.

¶22

¶23

B.A.(Hons.) in Hindi with OT/ B.Ed with Hindi as teaching subject from a recognized university.

¶24

iv) knowledge of Hindi upto Matric standard.”

¶25

It could not be successfully disputed that the petitioner did not answer the aforesaid qualifications. She had the qualification of B.A. with Hindi as an elective subject. However B.A. with Hindi and M.A. (Hindi) is not the requisite qualification for appointment as Hindi teacher as contemplated by advertisement which is in accordance with the School Cadre (Group 'C') Service Rules, 1998. She has, however, the qualification of Hons. in Hindi (Prabhakar) acquired in 1983 (P.6). According to the advertisement apart from Matriculation, the necessary qualification for appointment as Hindi teacher is Prabhakar/ B.A. (Hons) in Hindi. The other qualification at item No. (iii) is LTG/OT in Hindi or in the alternative B.A. (Hons.) in Hindi with OT/ B.Ed with Hindi as teaching subject. The knowledge of Hindi upto matric standard was also required. It is obvious that the petitioner does not fulfill either of the alternative qualification as per serial no. (iii) of the advertisement.

¶26

After hearing the learned counsel we find that the appellant do not fulfil either of two alternative necessary qualification at item No. (iii) as per advertisement. She does not have the qualification of LTG/OT in Hindi or B.A.(Hons.) in Hindi either with OT or B.Ed. with Hindi, although she is B.Ed. with Hindi without having B.A.(Hons.) in Hindi. In other words, she does not answer any of the two alternative qualifications mentioned at item

¶27

LPA No. 803 of 2010 (O&M) 3

¶28

No. (iii) of the qualifications advertised. The view taken by the learned Single Judge, therefore, does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting admission of the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.

¶29

(M.M.Kumar) Judge

¶30

(A. N. Jindal ) 15.7.2010 Judge

¶31

okg

Santosh Yadav v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Yadav v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suridner Kaur Vs Union of India & Ors.

Inder Parsad Vs M/S Frick India Ltd. and Anr.

Dinesh Chand and Others Vs Pgimer, Chandigarh through Its Director & Ors.

H.S.I.D.C Ltd. Vs Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Panipat and Another

Union of India and Others Vs Kulwinder Singh

Krishan Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.