Disposed

The State of Rajasthan v. Pratap Ram

Rajasthan HC24 May 2024SAW/398/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of a double bench special appeal regarding eligibility criteria for contractual teacher appointments. The bench referred to a pending single bench order and declined to intervene in the interim relief pending the Single Judge's final decision within three months.

What did the court decide?

Special appeal disposed of leaving parties to agitate before the Hon'ble Single Judge who must decide within three months.

The State of Rajasthan Vs Pratap Ram — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:23771-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 398/2024

¶4

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶5

The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

Pratap Ram, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village Sisarwada, Via Sojat Road, District Pali (Raj.).

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manish Patel, AAG For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh

¶11

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶12

Order

¶13

24/05/2024

¶14

Mr. Manish Patel, learned AAG submits that in the same controversy this Court has passed the order in the matter of State of Rajasthan of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Rishab Gosain in D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No.387/2024 , which reads as follows: -

¶15

"1. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Manish Patel drawn attention of this Court to the Rajasthan Contractual Hiring to Civil Posts Rules, 2022. He has referred to Rule 7 which reads as follows:-

¶16

“Qualifications and eligibility criteria for appointment- The academic qualification, experience, duties, responsibilities of the post created under these rules shall be decided by the Administrative Department with the concurrence of the Department of Personnel and Finance Department.”

¶17

2. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that it was in the domain of the State to prescribe

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[2024:RJ-JD:23771-DB]

¶20

[SAW-398/2024]

¶21

qualification and eligibility criteria for appointments. He further submits that such legislative power given to the State for making such appointments has been invoked and an advertisement was issued for the contractual appointment of Assistant Teacher (Level-I & II) and therefore, the rigors of NCTE notification prescribing qualification for a teacher would not apply.

¶22

3. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that the nature of job to be rendered by the contractual Assistant Teachers in accordance with the advertisement shall be akin to a teacher and thus, a notification of NCTE shall prevail as it has the legislative strength arising out of Right to Education Act, 2006.

¶23

4. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that once graduation has been prescribed as one of the qualifications by the NCTE along with the specialized training, then excluding English medium graduates while including 12th pass English medium students would not be in the right harmony of the requirement of the job to be assigned to the present respondents.

¶24

5. This Court after hearing counsel for parties at length finds that the matter will require comprehensive consideration and any intervention at the stage of interim order in the present facts and circumstances would unnecessarily reduce the ambit of the remedy for either of the parties. While keeping in consideration the factual matrix as well as the fact that we are only considering the interim order, we do not deem it appropriate to give any direction interfering with the interim order passed, the special appeal is disposed of while leaving it open to both the parties to agitate upon their cause before the Hon’ble Single Judge while requesting the Hon’ble Single Judge to decide the case within a period of three months from today.”

¶25

The present D.B. Special Appeal Writ is disposed of on the

¶26

same terms.

¶27

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

¶28

25-neha/Dinesh-

The State of Rajasthan v. Pratap Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Rajasthan v. Pratap Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kailash @ Pintu Vs State of Rajasthan

Karan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramdha Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs M/S.Giutam Trading Company

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs M/S. Sajjan Trading Company

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs M/S. Khetlagi Floor and Oil Mills