Allowed

Radhey Shyam Meena v. U O I and Ors.

Rajasthan HC9 Oct 2015CW/1716/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging rejection for Constable post, the High Court held that ineligibility based on obtaining a recognized 'Prathma' qualification in 2008 (before its withdrawal in 2013) was unjustified. The court quashed the rejection and directed consideration of the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's candidature shall not be rejected for possessing 'Prathma' qualification; it shall be considered if otherwise eligible.

Radhey Shyam Meena Vs U O I and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1716/2015 Radhey Shyam Meena Vs. Union of India (Ministry of Railway) & Ors.

¶2

{1}

¶3

I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAI PUR BENCH, JAI PUR

¶4

S.B. CI VI L W RI T PETI TI ON NO.1 7 1 6 / 2 0 1 5

¶5

Radhey Shyam Meena Vs.

¶6

Union of India through Ministry of Railway(RPF) & Ors.

¶7

DATE OF ORDER : 09.10.2015

¶8

HON ' BLE MR. JUSTI CE M.N. BHANDARI

¶9

Mr. Vikas Kabra, for the petitioner. Mr. Ratan Kaushik, for the respondents.

¶10

¶11

BY THE COURT

¶12

With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is heard finally.

¶13

The non-petitioners issued an advertisement bearing No.1/ 2011 for appointment on the post of Constable. The petitioner was allowed to appear in the selection test but his candidature was rejected at the final stage. It was precisely on the ground that the qualification obtained by the petitioner is of 'Prathma' from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. The qualification of Prathma was obtained by the petitioner in the year 2008. It was one of the recognized qualifications till withdrawal of recognition vide order dated 30.04.2013. There also, it was made clear that whoever had taken admission on or before 31.05.2013, would be eligible. The effect of the order dated 30.04.2013 at Annexure-8 is to consider 'Prathma' to be

¶14

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1716/2015 Radhey Shyam Meena Vs. Union of India (Ministry of Railway) & Ors.

¶15

{2}

¶16

one of the recognized qualification for those who enrolled for the course till 31.05.2013.

¶17

The petitioner completed the course in the year 2008 itself. The non-petitioners could not justify there action to declare petitioner to be ineligible for the post of Constable when the recruitment is of year 2011 and not for a recruitment after order dated 30.04.2013.

¶18

In view of the above, the action of the respondent to declare petitioner to be ineligible for the post of Constable on the ground discussed above cannot be accepted. The writ petition is allowed with the direction that the candidature of the petitioner should not be rejected merely for the reasons that he had obtained qualification of 'Prathma' from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad and accordingly his candidature may be considered and if petitioner is otherwise eligible and find place in the merit then to give him consequential benefits.

¶19

Before parting with the judgment, it need to be directed to the non-petitioners to circulate the order dated 30.04.2013 for its strict compliance so that onwards and for those, who were enrolled after 30.05.2013 for the course of 'Prathama' or other course of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan may not be recognized and the candidates who have obtained the

¶20

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1716/2015 Radhey Shyam Meena Vs. Union of India (Ministry of Railway) & Ors.

¶21

{3}

¶22

qualification aforesaid may not be considered. This may avoid even litigation and would keep consistency in the action of the non-petitioners and accordingly they would not take decision contrary to what has stated in their letter dated 30.04.2013.

¶23

The writ petition stands disposed of. This also disposes that stay application.

¶24

[ M.N. BHANDARI ] , J.

¶25

Goyal ramesh/Item No.61

¶26

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.- Ramesh Goyal, Jr.P.A.

Radhey Shyam Meena v. U O I and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhey Shyam Meena v. U O I 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

Mridula Bhatnagar Vs Raj Non Gov Edu and Ors.

Kamal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Smt Janki Bai @ Ramjanki Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Jaipur Development Authority J Vs Shri Sudhir Kumar and Ors.

Vishal Navriya Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dhruv Singh Choudhary Vs State Medical and Healthanr