Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Gurvinder Singh vs State (Forest Department)Ors on 9 February, 2017
Author: Alok Sharma
Bench: Alok Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14201/2011
Gurvinder Singh S/o Shri Ram Singh, Aged about 21 years, R/o
C/o Jasweer Singh Plot No. F/IV/8, Forest Colny, J.N.V. Colony,
Bikaner (Raj.)
...Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary, Government of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal and Chief Conservator of Forest, Forest
Department, Government of Rajashan.
3. The Deputy Conservator of Forest, (Wild Life), Bikaner (Raj.)
...Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sharma. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA Order 09/02/2017 The petitioner applied for the post of Forest Guard in terms of the advertisement dated 23.09.2010. He qualified the written examination, passed the physical efficiency test and appeared in the interview. At the end of interviews, a final select list was prepared under Rule 22(A)(9) of Rajasthan Forest Service Amendment (Rules) 2009.
However at the time of verification of documents of the (2 of 3) [CW-14201/2011] selectees it transpired that the petitioner claimed eligibility on purportedly having passed an examination from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh allegedly equivalent to the Secondary Examination of the Rajasthan Board of Secondary Education which was the minimum requisite qualification for appointment as a Forest Guard and was so advertised. On enquiries made from the RBSE Ajmer, the respondents were informed that the recognition of Jamia Urdu, Aligarh had been cancelled pursuant to the direction of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of D.B. Special Appeal No.534/2005 titled State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Miss. Firdos Tarannum & Anr. decided on 20.01.2006. It was held that Jamia Urdu, Aligarh has no authority in law to issue any certificate. The respondents held that the petitioner thus did not have the requisite education qualification as notified under the advertisement dated 23.09.2010 for the post of Forest Guard.
Heard. Considered.
A perusal of the advertisement dated 23.09.2010 inviting the applications for consideration for appointment of Forest Guards on 1000 vacant post indicates that the minimum education qualification prescribed was Secondary from a recognized Board or qualification equivalent thereto.
I am of the considered view that the matter has been considered by the respondents in detail in the context of the judgment of the D.B of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Miss. Firdos Tarannum & Anr. (supra) and it has been rightly concluded that certification from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh could not be considered as equivalent to a (3 of 3) [CW-14201/2011] Secondary pass from RBSE for reason of which the petitioner did not have the requisite minimum educational qualification to be appointed as a Forest Guard. Nothing perverse or illegal can be attributed to the decision of the respondents based as it is a D.B. judgment of this Court.
I find no force in the petition. Dismissed.
(ALOK SHARMA) J.
Himanshu Soni.
52/-