Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Jaipal vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 November, 2022

Author: Arun Bhansali

Bench: Arun Bhansali

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                        JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16632/2022
Jaipal S/o Diwan Chand, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village And
Post Sardarpura Jiwan, Tehsil Sadulshahar, District Ganganagar
(Raj.).
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.   State     Of    Rajasthan,       Through        The      Principal        Secretary,
     Department       Of     Rural    Development            And      Panchayati      Raj
     (Panchayati       Raj),       Government           Of     Rajasthan,         Jaipur,
     Rajasthan.
2.   Additional Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati
     Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.   Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Udaipur, Rajasthan.
                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Pawan Singh.
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Kunal Upadhyay for
                                   Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG.


        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order 15/11/2022 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved of the endorsement dated 20.10.2022 (Annex.11) made by the respondents, wherein, on account of non-inclusion of petitioner's name in the list of candidates found eligible and the representation made by the petitioner, it was indicated that candidature of the petitioner was rejected earlier and that the period of experience and that of computer qualification is one and the same and, therefore, the petitioner was not eligible.

The petitioner applied for recruitment on the post of LDC pursuant to notification 2013. In the application form, the petitioner indicated his computer qualification as diploma in (Downloaded on 15/11/2022 at 09:03:25 PM) (2 of 4) [CW-16632/2022] computer science / computer application from EIILM University, Sikkim in the year 2012, however, the candidature of the petitioner was rejected at the relevant time.

Whereafter, on re-initiation of proceedings by the department dated 7.9.2022, the name of the petitioner was reflected for verification of documents. The petitioner produced mark-sheets of having done his PG diploma in Computer Application from Mahatama Gandhi, University, Meghalaya, the date of issue of the mark-sheet were 17.4.2012 and 11.9.2012.

The petitioner for the purpose of award of bonus marks claimed experience vide certificate dated 9.8.2017 (Annex.4), wherein, the petitioner had worked from 1.10.2006 to 31.3.2013 for a period of 5 years & 5 months.

Apparently, during document verification the competent authority on finding that the period of petitioner's experience was coinciding with the period he claims to have obtained his PG diploma in computer application from Mahatama Gandhi, University, Meghalaya, rejected the petitioner's candidature.

Submissions have been made that the petitioner has obtained qualification of PG in computer application from University at Meghalaya, offline and as such there was no reason for the respondents to reject the candidature of the petitioner based on such conflict of period.

A perusal of the order dated 4.8.2017 (Annex.12) issued by the respondents indicates that qua the degrees obtained from Mahatama Gandhi, University, Meghalaya, it was specifically indicated that same must be on-campus.

Counsel for the petitioner relied on another clause of the circular, wherein, reference has been made that if degree has (Downloaded on 15/11/2022 at 09:03:25 PM) (3 of 4) [CW-16632/2022] been obtained from State Universities outside the State, both on- campus and off-campus candidates would be eligible. As noticed, the said provision pertains to State Universities and not to private universities like Mahatama Gandhi, University, Mehgalaya.

Besides the above, as for the Mahatama Gandhi, University, Meghalaya, specific stipulation has been made, the said provision would have no application. In that view of the matter, rejection of petitioner's candidature cannot be faulted.

The petitioner has then made submissions that as the petitioner is in possession of another diploma in computer application of the year 1998-99 from Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal (Annex.13), he may be permitted to rely on the said qualification, as the respondents have permitted production of other qualifications during course of document verification.

A perusal of the entire sequence of events would reveal that the petitioner though claims to be in possession of diploma from Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal of the year 1998-99 and P.G. diploma in computer application from Mahatama Gandhi, University, Meghalaya of the year 2012, however, in the application form relied on, his qualification from EIILMU, Sikkim and that also was acquired in the year 2012 and now once the qualification from EIILMU, Sikkim as well as Mahatama Gandhi, University, Meghalaya, has been rejected, he has sprang up with the qualification from Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal.

The non-reliance on the said qualification at the relevant time and springing up the same only after rejection of petitioner's candidature based on the documents already produced, for the (Downloaded on 15/11/2022 at 09:03:25 PM) (4 of 4) [CW-16632/2022] first time before this Court only, raises serious doubts on the said claim, as such the same cannot be countenanced.

The petition has no substance. The same is, therefore, dismissed.

(ARUN BHANSALI), J 75-Sumit/-

(Downloaded on 15/11/2022 at 09:03:25 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)