This is a common order dismissing multiple writ petitions challenging the appointments of candidates with Bachelor of Physical Education degrees as Physical Training Instructors.
Writ petitions dismissed on the basis of settled law and prior judgments confirming that BPE degree holders are not eligible for the post of PTI.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8630/2021
Rajendra Singh Khichar S/o Shri Mangal Chand, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village And Post Gokulpura, District Sikar.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10941/2018
Udai Singh Yadav Son Of Shri Ram, Resident Of Village Sirorkhurd Tehsil Mundawar District Alwar.
----Petitioner
Versus
(2 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11913/2018
----Petitioners
Versus
----Petitioners
Versus
(3 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Board, Jaipur Through Its Secretary, Rsmssb, State Agriculture Management Institution Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15434/2019
Ajay Singh Maderna Son Of Shri Mool Chand, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Nagla Terahiya, Tehsil Roopwas, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18068/2019
(4 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
(Rajasthan)
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20281/2019
(5 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Chander Kant, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Harsoli Tehsil Kotkasim District Alwar (Raj)
(6 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Pal Padar Tehsil Bidhiwada Distt. Doongarpur At Present Rajasthan High Court Bench Jaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20583/2019
(7 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Bimala Kumari Daughter Of Shri Moola Ram W/o Shri Sumer Singh, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Village Maharana, PostKhanpur, Tehsil- Buhana, Dist- Jhunjunu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7102/2020
Mitha Lal Meena Son Of Shri Kalyan Sahai Meena, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of-V.p.o. Daglav, Tehsil-Dausa, District-Dausa, (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
(8 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Marg, New Delhi. 110002
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7326/2020
Ajay Singh Maderna Son Of Shri Mool Chand, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of V And P. Nagla Terhiyha, Tehsil Roopvas, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. Rajendra Kumar Soni Mr. R.D. Meena Mr. Raj Kumar Goyal |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : | Mr. Ganesh Meena, AAG with Mr. Saurabh Sharma |
| Mr. S. Zakawat Ali, AGC | ||
| Mr. Sandeep Kumar Maheshwari Mr. Rakesh Soni for |
||
| Ms. Sweta Pareek | ||
| Mr. Arpit Jain for | ||
| Mr. Nalin G. Narain |
(9 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Mr. Parth Sharma for Mr. Amit Lubhaya
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
25/11/2022
The matters come up on an application 1/2022 filed by the respondents seeking dismissal of the writ petition in the light of judgment in case of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8800/2018; Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Although, application has been filed in one of the case only; but, since, issue involved in all these writ petitions is common, the same are being decided vide this common order.
Learned counsels for the respondents submit that the issue involved herein as to treating the Bachelor of Physical Education (for brevity, “BPE”), three years degree course as a valid qualification for appointment to the post of Physical Training Instructor (for brevity, “PTI”) in the Secondary and Senior Secondary Schools is no more res integra and stands resolved by the aforesaid judgment of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court wherein, identical writ petitions have been dismissed. They, therefore, pray that the instant writ petitions may also be dismissed in view thereof.
Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners, inviting attention of this Court towards the reply filed by the National Council for Teacher Education (for brevity, “NCTE”), would submit that the degree possessed by the petitioners is sufficient qualification for their appointments as PTI. They submit that since the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while dismissing the writ
(10 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
petition in case of Vinod Kumar (supra) did not consider the aforesaid aspect, the same has to be held ‘per incuriam’ and the writ petitions deserves to be allowed.
Heard. Considered.
The issue as to whether the candidates with BPE three years degree course are qualified to be appointed as PTI is no more res integra as a co-ordinate Bench of this court has, in case of Vinod Kumar (supra) , relying upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in case of Ganesh Narayanmali & Ors. Vs. State (Education Department) & Ors., MANU/RH/0291/2016 , held that the candidates having BPE three years degree course are not eligible to be appointed as PTI Grade-III.
Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that judgment in case of Vinod Kumar (supra) is per incuriam as the stand taken by the NCTE was not considered, cannot be countenanced inasmuch as a Division Bench judgment of this Court has, in case of Ganesh Narayanmali (supra) , while dealing with the similar contention of the NCTE therein, held as under:
“16. Even when we look into the
amendment Notification of NCTE Dt. 12.11.2014, as regards the post of PTI Gr. III (Primary & Upper Primary Education) for classes I to VIII is concerned, BPE (3 year degree) is still not the minimum academic & professional qualification in holding a candidate eligible. At the same time, as regard the post of PTI Gr.II (Secondary & High School) for classes IX & X and for Senior Secondary/Intermediate for Classes XI-XII is concerned, apart from B.P.E., B.P. Ed. and M.P. Ed. are also the prescribed
(11 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
professional qualification required to consider a candidate eligible to hold the post of PTI Gr.II.
(12 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
under the present advertisement Dt. 18.09.2013 unless the Rules provide/prescribe equivalent qualification, merely by correspondence Dt. 15.07.2015 holding BPE (3 year degree) as the equivalent qualification cannot be considered as the basic minimum academic/professional qualification to hold a candidate eligible for the post of PTI Gr.II/Gr. III in question under the scheme of Rules, 1971 and to further support neither under the scheme of Rules, 1971 nor in the advertisement Dt. 18.09.2013, there is any provision prescribed of equivalent qualification. Thus, one is supposed to hold the basis minimum academic/professional qualification, which is prescribed under the scheme of Rules, 1971 & not the equivalent qualification prayed for.
Therefore, this Court is satisfied that the issue involved herein is no more res integra and stand decided by a co-ordinate
(13 of 13)
[CW-8630/2021]
Bench of this Court based on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in case of Ganesh Narayanmali (supra).
In view of the aforesaid, the application deserves to be allowed. The application is allowed.
These writ petitions are dismissed accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Sudha/18-27
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the issue regarding eligibility of BPE degree holders for PTI posts is res integra considering prior judgments.
Whether an NCTE communication regarding equivalent qualification can override prescribed Rules/Regulations for eligibility.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Followed¶149
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8800/2018; Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Ganesh Narayanmali & Ors. Vs. State (Education Department) & Ors.Followed¶157
Ganesh Narayanmali & Ors. Vs. State (Education Department) & Ors., MANU/RH/0291/2016
Rajendra Singh Khichar and others
State of Rajasthan
Rajasthan Employee Selection Board
Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan
National Council For Teacher Education
Mahendar Kumar Goyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
