Dismissed

Satya Narayan Saini Son of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Jan 2022CW/1104/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged minimum educational qualifications for basic computer instructor posts under amended Rules. The Court held that eligibility criteria for public employment lie within authority's discretion and refused to substitute its opinion.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted. The petition challenging the educational eligibility criteria was dismissed.

Satya Narayan Saini Son of Shri Kanhaiya… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1104/2022

¶3

Satya Narayan Saini Son Of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saini, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Jiorta Khurd, District Dausa (Raj.)

¶4

Sunil Kumar Saini Son Of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saini, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Jiorta Khurd, District Dausa (Raj.)

¶5

Piyush Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of 1/528, Kala Kuwan, Housing Board, Alwar (Raj.)

¶6

Ajay Kumar Meena Son Of Shri Lallu Lal Meena, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Chandawas, Dausa (Raj.)

¶7

Shanti Lal Meena Son Of Shri Badri Prasad Meena, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of 253, Village Meena Dantka Pura, Kotri, Karauli (Raj.)

¶8

Chhoti Lal Meena Son Of Shri Kanna Ram Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Rampurwas, Doliwali Dhani, Post Dev Gaon, Bassi, District Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

Roshan Lal Meena Son Of Shri Jagdish Narayan Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Nonda Ki Dhani, Gadholi, Gothra, District Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

Basram Gurjar Son Of Shri Mannaram Gurjar, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of 33, Gurjaron Ka Mohalla, Tundera, District Tonk (Raj.)

¶11

Vikram Mahawar Son Of Shri Budhram Mahawar, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Bahadurpur, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶12

Vishnu Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Siyaram Sharma, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Brahman Mohalla, Hodayli, District Dausa (Raj.)

¶13

Sandeep Singh Son Of Shri Dharm Chand, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Village Jogawad, Tehsil Mundawar, Banoth, District Alwar (Raj.)

¶14

Jhalak Maderna Son Of Shri Udai Singh, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Aipur, Ghatri, Bharatpur (Raj.)

¶15

Pradeep Kumar Son Of Shri Rajendra Singh, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Badi Wala Mohalla, Police Maidan Ke

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[CW-1104/2022]

¶18

Paas, Khetri District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶19

Harshit Del Son Of Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Delpura, Gudadevji, District Bundi (Raj.)

¶20

----Petitioners

¶21

Versus

¶22

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Joint Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶23

The Secretary Education Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶24

Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.) 4. Secretary, Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministrial Service Selection Board, Durgapura, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶25

----Respondents

¶26

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma & Ms. Komal Kumari Giri through VC For Respondent(s) :

¶27

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶28

Judgment

¶29

24/01/2022

¶30

The petitioners have challenged the vires of the Rajasthan Educational (State and Subordinate) Service Rules, 2021 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the said Rules') which came to be amended vide Rajasthan Educational (State and Subordinate) Service (Amendment) Rules, 2022 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the amendment Rules') to the extent these Rules prescribe minimum educational qualifications for eligibility for direct recruitment to the post of basic computer instructor.

¶31

The petitioners hold three years diploma in computer science. By virtue of the said Rules as amended by the

¶32

(3 of 4)

¶33

[CW-1104/2022]

¶34

amendment Rules, the post of basic computer instructor is to be filled up through direct recruitment. To be eligible, a candidate must satisfy the following educational criteria:-

¶35

2 Basic	100% - Graduate and 'A' Level/PGDCA (Minimum
Computer	one year)
Instructor	Or Bachelor in Engineering (B.E.)/Bachelor in Technology (B.Tech) in Computer Science (CS)/Information Technology (IT)/Electronics & Communications Engineering (ECE)/Electrical Engineering (EE)/ Electrical and Electronics Engineering (EEE)/ Electronic Instrumentation & Control (EIC)/ Telecommunications & Instrumentation (TIE) OR B.Sc. in Computer Science (CS)/Infomation Technolgy (IT) OR Bachelor in Computer Application (BCA) from a University established by the law in India OR Any equivalent or higher qualification recognised by the Government

2 Basic

100%
- Graduate and 'A' Level/PGDCA (Minimum

Computer

one year)

Instructor

Or
Bachelor in Engineering (B.E.)/Bachelor in
Technology (B.Tech) in Computer Science
(CS)/Information Technology
(IT)/Electronics & Communications
Engineering (ECE)/Electrical Engineering
(EE)/ Electrical and Electronics
Engineering (EEE)/ Electronic
Instrumentation & Control (EIC)/
Telecommunications & Instrumentation
(TIE)
OR
B.Sc. in Computer Science
(CS)/Infomation Technolgy (IT)
OR
Bachelor in Computer Application (BCA)
from a University established by the law
in India
OR
Any equivalent or higher qualification
recognised by the Government

¶36

The short contention of the petitioners is that exclusion of three years diploma in computer science from the list of eligibility criteria contained in the said Rules for the post in question is arbitrary and discriminatory. This ground the petitioners seek to make good by pointing out that for the post of computer programming assistant, the State recognizes the said qualification as essential eligibility. According to the petitioners nature of duties and responsibilities in both cases being identical, exclusion of this qualification for the purpose of recruitment to the post of basic computer instructor amounts to discrimination.

¶37

(4 of 4)

¶38

[CW-1104/2022]

¶39

We do not find that the petitioners have made out any case for interference. What should be the eligibility criteria for holding a particular post in public employment has essentially to be left to the discretion of the authorities. The Court would not substitute its opinion for that of recruiting authority in such specialized fields. By mere statement that the two posts namely, basic computer instructor and computer programming assistant involve identical nature of duties, responsibilities and workload, these facts do not get established. Admittedly two posts are in different cadres and carry different nomenclature. Unless and until full duty lists, the nature of job to be performed and all other relevant aspects are brought on record, the two posts cannot be held to be equivalent in all respects.

¶40

In the result the petition is dismissed.

¶41

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶42

(AKIL KURESHI),CJ

¶43

KAMLESH KUMAR/26

Satya Narayan Saini Son of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Narayan Saini Son of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Raman Gupta S/O Shri Murari Lal Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Officer, Vs Pawan Bansal S/O Shri Ramnarayan Bansal

Budhi Prakash Sharma S/O Harsh Narayan Sharma Vs Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Lokesh Thakur Son of Late Shri Bhikam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Commercial Taxes Officer Vs M/S Shree Cement Product (India) Pvt. Limited

Kailash Chand S/O Shri Harish Chand Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan