Dismissed

Heera Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 May 2024CW/909/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of multiple writ petitions filed by candidates contesting their antagonism by the State of Rajasthan due to the non-recognition of their educational qualifications. The Court declined to act as a fact-finding authority and directed petitioners to file representations before the Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, for verification of course validity. The petitions are dis

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions dismissed. Petitioners directed to file representation before Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, with details of courses within 31.05.2024. Director to decide eligibility before 30

Heera Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:19950]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13088/2020

¶4

Sada Ram S/o Bhura Ram, Aged About 28 Years, By Caste Bishnoi, Resident Of Vpo Nedi Nadi, Tehsil Dhorimanna District Barmer.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

The Dy. Director (Admn.), Integrated Child Development Services, Women And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶9

Rajasthan Employees Selection Board, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Secretary.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

Connected With

¶12

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13138/2020

¶13

Sukh Dev S/o Shri Bhgirath Ram, Aged About 28 Years, By Caste Bishnoi, Resident Of Vpo Kharad, Tehsil Dhorimanna District Barmer.

¶14

----Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶17

The Dy. Director (Admn.), Integrated Child Development Services, Women And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶18

Rajasthan Employees Selection Board, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Secretary.

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13193/2020

¶21

Pramila Bishnoi D/o Shri Bhagirath Godara W/o Shri Devi Chand, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Village Virava, Tehsil Chitalwana District Jalore.

¶22

----Petitioner

¶23

Versus

¶24

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Women Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶25

The Dy. Director (Admn.), Integrated Child Development Services, Women And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶26

Rajasthan Employees Selection Board, Durgapura, Jaipur

(2 of 5)

[2024:RJ-JD:19950]

[CW-13088/2020]

Through Its Secretary.

¶31

----Respondents

¶32

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13455/2020

¶33

Jhumar Lal S/o Shri Sona Ram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Tajani Bano Ki Dhani, Nevra Road, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶34

----Petitioner

¶35

Versus

¶36

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Woman Empowerment And Child Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶37

1. The Director, Woman And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶38

The Secretary, Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Services Selection Board, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶39

----Respondents

¶40

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 909/2021

¶41

1. Heera Ram S/o Uda Ram, Aged About 34 Years, Sunara Ki Dhani, Dudhu, Via Dhorimanna, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶42

Pukhraj S/o Sataram, Aged About 24 Years, Village Post Undu, Shiv, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶43

----Petitioners

¶44

Versus

¶45

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Woman Empowerment And Child Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶46

The Director, Woman And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶47

The Secretary, Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Services Selection Board, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶48

----Respondents

¶49

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8737/2021

¶50

Ameda Ram S/o Shri Magha Ram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Post Lapala, Kosariya Baytu, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶51

Mohan Lal S/o Shri Prahlad Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/ o Village Post Panori Joniyaon Ki Dhani, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶52

Raju Ram S/o Shri Bhangava Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Post Bhalisar, Tehsil Dhorimana, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶53

----Petitioners

¶54

Versus

¶55

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Woman

(3 of 5)

[2024:RJ-JD:19950]

[CW-13088/2020]

Empowerment And Child Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶60

1. The Director, Woman And Child Development Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶61

The Secretary, Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Services Selection Board, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶62

----Respondents

¶63

For Petitioner(s)	: Dr. Ashok Choudhary
	Mr. Anil Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Vishal Jangid
	Mr. Vineet Sanadhya

¶64

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶65

Order

¶66

06/05/2024

¶67

The petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that the respondents are not considering their educational qualification(s) to be valid though the same has been validly and legally acquired.

¶68

Learned counsel for the petitioners tried to satisfy the Court that the educational qualification(s) they have acquired is valid in the eye of law.

¶69

Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioners have rushed to this Court without their eligibility having been finally determined.

¶70

Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that this Court in its limited jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot act as a fact finding authority and pronounce upon the validity or otherwise.

¶71

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

(4 of 5)

[2024:RJ-JD:19950]

[CW-13088/2020]

Indisputably, no final order has yet been passed. The petitioners have approached this Court under the apprehension of their candidature being rejected as their name was not given in the select list.

¶76

In the facts of the present case, this Court is of the view that the issue in relation to the different courses/degree(s) which the petitioners claim to have obtained is better left to be decided by the respondents.

¶77

The writ petitions are, therefore, disposed of with the directions to petitioners to file their representation before the Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner. The representation shall necessarily include the following information, apart from other information, which they feel necessary and are elicited by the respondents:

¶78

(i) Date of admission and duration of the course. (ii) Whether the course undertaken by the petitioners were correspondence course or was a regular course?

¶79

(iii) Proof of payment of fee for the course including date and mode of payment.

¶80

(iv) Dates when the petitioners have attended the classes.

¶81

(v) The schedule of the examination conducted, if any.

¶82

(vi) Where did the petitioners take exams (place).

¶83

(vii) Any document supplied by the Institute in order to establish its authenticity.

¶84

Once the petitioners have submitted their representation, the Director, Secondary Education or any Joint Director nominated by him shall consider the representation(s) submitted by the petitioners and the documents filed therewith and decide as to

[2024:RJ-JD:19950]

[CW-13088/2020]

(5 of 5)

whether the course/ degree obtained by the petitioners is valid in the eye of law or not.

¶89

The Director/ Joint Director shall be free to undertake any fact finding inquiry at the State’s level. 11. It will be required of the petitioners to file requisite documents on or before 31.05.2024, by way of registered post acknowledgment due.

¶90

The Director or his nominee shall decide petitioners’ eligibility preferably before 30.06.2024.

¶91

In case petitioners’ diploma course(s)/ NTT are found valid, appointment order(s) shall be issued.

¶92

If, the diploma obtained by the petitioners are found to be invalid/ non genuine, a communication in writing shall be sent to the petitioners, whereafter, the respondents shall be free to fill up the post.

¶93

The stay petitions also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶94

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶95

499-Arvind/-

Heera Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heera Ram 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Asif Khan Vs M.D. Bhilwara Zila Dudh Utpadak Sahkaari Sangh Ltd.

Ashok Kumar Vs Raj. Public Service Commission, Ajmer

Devendra Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Lal Purohit Vs the State of Rajasthan

Giriraj Garg Vs the State of Rajasthan