Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ravi Shankar Sharma vs State (Education Department) Anr on 2 February, 2017
Bench: K.S. Jhaveri, Vinit Kumar Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 62 / 2017
Ravi Shankar Sharma S/o Shri Ram Swaroop Sharma, Aged About
42 Years, R/o Pradhano Ki Dhani, Post Nathawala, Shahpura,
Distt. Jaipur (Raj.).
----Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through the Principal Secretary,
Department of Education, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Sanskrit Education, Government of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Appellant(s) : Mr. M.K. Sharma & Mr. D.C. Jain. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Judgment Per Hon'ble Jhaveri J.
02/02/2017
1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge has not entertained the writ petition preferred by the petitioner.
2. Counsel for the appellant/petitioner has contended that following reliefs were prayed in the writ petition:
"(i) The impugned orders dated 20.08.2007 (Anx-4) may be quashed and set aside and degree of B.Ed. Obtained by the petitioner may be declared valid for the purpose of appointment for the post of teacher grade-III.
(ii) Further directing the respondents to allow appointment to the petitioner on the post of Sanskrit Teacher Grade-III from the (2 of 5) [SAW-62/2017] date on which less meritorious candidates have allowed appointment with all consequential benefits of service including arrear of pay, allowances along with interest @ 18% per annum from date of due to date of payment, seniority and promotion etc."
3. The Director, Sanskrit Education vide his letter (Annexure-4) dated 20.08.2007 has informed the appellant/petitioner as under:
" jktLFkku ljdkj funs'kky;] laLd`r f'k{kk] jktLFkku] t;iqj Øekad % fulaf'k @esfjV@U;k;k- izdj.k@98&99@ fnukad vkns'k ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ihB t;iqj esa nk;j ,l-ch-flfoy fjV fifV'ku la[;k 3666@1999 esa ekuuh; U;k;ky; us vius vkns'k fnukad 08-12-2006 } kjk ;kfpdkdrkZ ik=rk iw.kZ djrs gksa rks fu;qfDr fn;s tkus dk vkns'k iznku fd;k gSA ;kfpdkdrkZ Jh jfo'kadj 'kekZ iq= Jh jkeLo:i 'kekZ us ch-,M- ijh{kk us'kuy VhplZ Vªsfuax dkyst vjsj] ftyk e/kqcuh] fcgkj ls mRrh.kZ dh gSA jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn ds iwoZ {ks=h; dk;kZy; Hkqous'oj us vius i= Øekad bZvkjlh @ 06&04@2006&07@732 fnaukd 31- 03-2007 }kjk voxr djk;k gS fd " National Teachers Training College, Arer Dist- Madhubani, Bihar was allowed to continue up to 1998 vide its letter dated 6-3-1998 Later, It was found out that the institution has got the recognition by producing fraudulent NOC form the State Govt. to this office. Hence, the order allowing to continue No-5594 dated 6-3-1998 was cancelled vide order No. 10137 dated 6/8.9.1999 and recognition order No. 7633 dated 23.2.1999 was withdrawn vide this office order No. 9415 dated 4/7.6.99 Therefore all the degree obtained from the institution were declared invalid vide this office order No. 721 dated 31.3.2000."
mDr i=kuqlkj bl dkyst }kjk tkjh dh xbZ lHkh fMfxz;ksa dks vekU; ?kksf"kr dj fn;k x;k gSA Jh 'kekZ dh fMxzh Hkh blh dkyst }kjk tkjh gksus ds dkj.k vekU; gSA vr% ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds vkns'kuqlkj ;s fu;qfDr ds fy, ik= ugha gSA (3 of 5) [SAW-62/2017] funs'kd] laLd`r f'k{kk jktLFkku t;iqj izfrfyfi fuEufyf[kr dks lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq izsf"kr gS%& 1- mi'kklu lfpo ¼r`rh;½ f'k{kk ¼xzqi &3 fof/k izdks"B½ foHkkx] dks muds i=kkad is 6 ¼281½ f'k{kk&3@foiz@99 fnukad 9- 7- 07 ds dze esa lwpukFkZA 2- Jh jfo'kadj 'kekZ iq= Jh jkeLo:i 'kekZ eq0iz/kkuksa dh <k.kh iksLV ukFkkokyk ok;k 'kkgiqjk ftyk t;iqj fiu 0303103 3- fof/k vuqHkkx funs'kky;A 4-laj{k.k iaftdkA funs'kd] laLd`r f'k{kk] jktLFkku] t;iqj""
4. The said letter was though endorsed to him but it is stated not to have been received by him. It is stated to have been received by him only in the contempt proceeding in the year 2015.
5. Counsel for the appellant/petitioner has mainly contended that it was not his fault to get admission in an institution which was recognised at the relevant time but subsequently, it was found that on the basis of fraudulent NOC which was secured from the State Government it was recognised, therefore, it is the fault of institution and he should not suffer. He has relied upon the decision of this Court at Principal seat at Jodhpur in the case of Rakesh Kumar vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. in SB Civil Writ Petition No.3868/2001, decided on 22.12.2006 and the decision of Division Bench in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Jabra Ram 2005(1) WLC (Raj.) 637 wherein in para 17 & 18 the division bench has observed as under:
"17. From the above facts, it is clear that the respondent-petitioner has taken the (4 of 5) [SAW-62/2017] admission in the year 1995-96 and status quo was to be maintained for the academic session 1995-96. The respondent- petitioner completed his course in 1995-96 and till the completion of the course by the respondent-petitioner, regulations were not in force. The regulations framed by the Government of India were published in the Gazette of Government of India on 24.02.1996. Thus, the process of recognizing degrees could not be commenced before 24.02.1996. the Act of 1993 has come into force w.e.f. 1.7.1995 but regulations framed were published on 24.2.1996. The process of recognition was started after 17.8.1997. The respondent- petitioner has taken admission in the year 1995-96 and passed the course in the year 1995-96 (Annexure R/1). The Division Bench of this Court in similarly situated case in Ram Narain vs. State along with three other writ petitions (supra) while interpreting Section 14 and 17 of the act of 1993 as held as follows:-
"The two provisions read together convey in no certain terms that whether under Section 14 or under Section 17, the effect of the commencement of the Act or the refusal of the application for recognition or withdrawal of recognition already granted does not affect the fact of ongoing courses in teachers education offered by any cognised institution or university recognised by law."
"As in the present petitioners, all the candidates had obtained requisite certificate of physical training education before the close of academic session 1995-96, from Nagpur University after having received training in recognised institution their validity remain unaffected by subsequent non inclusion of Nagpur University amongst the recognised institution by the NCTE."
18. Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid Division Bench judgment of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2884/1999 alongwith three other petitions (supra) and the observations made by us hereinabove, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the instant appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. The appellant-
(5 of 5) [SAW-62/2017] respondents are directed to comply with the order passed by the learned Single Judge within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order."
6. He has further contended that the appellant/petitioner may not be granted appointment but the degree obtained by him may be declared valid.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.
8. We have considered the document (Annexure-4) dated 20.08.2007 which was passed keeping in mind the evidence on record and when the institution has fraudulently obtained NOC from the State Government and the petitioner has got admission in that institution, the institution which was not recognised by the competent authority, that degree cannot be held to be valid, merely because, the petitioner was cheated by the fraudulent people.
9. In that view of the matter, we are in competent agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge over and above the reasons given by us. We upheld the order of the State Government dated 20.08.2007. No interference is called for.
10. The appeal stands dismissed.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)J. (K.S. JHAVERI)J. Asheesh Kr. Yadav/11