Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Muli Machara & Ors vs State & Anr on 13 July, 2017
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9268 / 2013
1. Muli Machara D/o Shri Kuna Ram Machara, aged 28 years,
resident of VPO Basi, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner.
2. Sangeeta Gorava D/o Shri Ladhu Ram, resident of VPO Ramsar,
Tehsil Nokha District Bikaner.
3. Mahendra Kumar S/o Shri Hari Parshad, resident of VPO Alkhisar,
Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner.
4. Radha Bishnoi D/o Shri Bhanvar Lal, resident of VPO Kubsu Tehsil
Nokha, District Bikaner.
5. Asha Kumar D/o Shri Prem Sukh, resident of Village Mukam, Tehsil
Nokha, District Bikaner.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of
Education, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer
through its Secretary.
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.L.Bhati, Govt. Counsel &
Mr. Rakesh Arora
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
Judgment / Order 13/07/2017 The prayer in the present petition is to direct the respondent Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer to issue the eligibility certificate to the petitioners in order to enable them to participate in the Senior Secondary School Examination conducted by the respondent Board.
It is contended that the Board of Secondary Education did (2 of 3) [CW-9268/2013] not issue the eligibility certificate to the petitioners despite the fact that the petitioners passed the Adeeb Course from the Jamia Urdu, Aligarh much before the cancellation of its recognition.
The issue involved in the present writ petition is no more res integra in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Miss Firdos Tarannum reported in 2006(1) RDD 467(Raj.)(DB) after due consideration of earlier decisions observed as under:
"17. Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh is an institution which is allegedly parting Urdu Education. The respondent- petitioners have not shown us any sanction of law which had authorized this institution to function as an institution teaching Urdu and issuing certificates and degrees. The recognition of a certificate or degree being a valid qualification for an appointment is that the Institution issuing it should have legal sanction behind it. It may be either under the orders of the Central Government, State Government or the University Grants Commission. None of these three authorities have issued any sanction in favour of the Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh. Had it been there, the learned counsel for the petitioner- respondent would have placed it before this Court.
18. The best case of the petitioner-respondent before us is that the qualification was recognized by the State Government to be equivalent as shown in the letter dated 03.02.1965, quoted in the writ petition. Firstly a Division Bench of this Court has not given credence to this Notification because the original Notification had not been placed either before us or before the Division Bench deciding the case of Jalahudin Silawat (supra). In any case, the qualification enumerated in the Notification are antiquated qualifications because now the qualification has undergone a sea change. It cannot be read to be equivalent to the present day qualifications. The State of Rajasthan had issued letters dated 24.04.1993 making it explicit that only those qualifications which are issued by the institutions, which are the creation of law, can alone be recognized. Apart from this in the Notification dated 24.04.1993 it has been made 4 clear that Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh is not an Institution established by law. Thus the State of Rajasthan in (3 of 3) [CW-9268/2013] its Notification dated 23.11.1991 had made it more than obvious that any qualification acquired by taking up an examination held by Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh would not be a qualification which would be available for seeking to be appointed.
19. In this back ground, the law laid down in the case of Tayyab Hussain (supra), is clearly distinguishable because while the case was decided it was not brought to the notice of the Division Bench that the Certificates as issued by the Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh, are not recognized by the State of Rajasthan, at least after 1991, and the decision in Miss Altaf Bano (supra) is also distinguishable because while that judgment was rendered, the State Government Notification of 23.11.1991 and 24.04.1993 were not brought to the notice of the Court. Therefore, these two cases and certain Single Bench decisions rendered in the light of these decision, will not lay down a correct proposition of law.
20. In the light of the matter, it is considered that the petitioner who has acquired Urdu qualifications issued by Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh, possess a qualification which is not a qualification awarded by an Institution which had a legal sanction behind it, therefore, the same is not available for the purpose of employment in the State of Rajasthan.
21. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the opinion that the degrees issued by the Zamiya Urdu, Aligarh would be hit by the orders of the Central Government and that of the State of Rajasthan whereby the Degrees and Certificates issued by such Institutions which are not established under the law are not recognized for the purpose of appointment. In that view of the matter, the judgment of the learned Single Judge deserves to be set aside. The writ petition consequently is also dismissed."
In view of the settled position, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.
(NIRMALJIT KAUR), J.
Anil/105