1. :- The instant writ petition has been filed seeking direction to provide appointment to the petitioner on the post of Teacher Grade III as per his merit from the date the persons less meritorious than the petitioner have been provided appointment with all consequential benefits and reliefs.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner is a member of Other Backward Classes and possesses requisite qualification for appointment on the post of teacher Grade III. In pursuance of the Advertisement dated 24.6.1998 (Annx.1), he submitted his application for appointment on the post in question. Persons less meritorious than the petitioner, like respondents No.4 and 5, have been given appointment but petitioner has been denied appointment on the ground that he has obtained B.Ed. Degree from Barkatullah Vishvavidhyalaya, Bhopal and the matter regarding recognition of B.Ed. Degree from this institution is pending before the High Court. However, the matter in this regard has been decided by this Court in SBCWP No. 2477/1997, Narendra Kumar Soni v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 2.3.98 and thereafter the petitioner approached respondents for providing him appointment but he was asked to obtain such order from the Court. In view of the various orders issued by the State Government, no separate recognition is B.Ed. Degree is required and the B.Ed. Degree from the aforesaid University is recognised by the University Grants Commission but still petitioner has been denied appointment whereas Shri Mohit Saxena and Shri Gordhan Lal, who have obtained the B.Ed. Degree from the said university, have been given appointment. Hence this writ petition.

3. Refuting the averments made in the writ petition and justifying their action, the respondents have filed a reply stressing that the B.Ed. Degree obtained by correspondence course from the aforesaid university has not been recognised by the State Government for the purpose of giving appointment. It has further been contended that the Division Bench of this Court has remanded the matter to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration and since the petitioner does not possess a valid B.Ed. Degree from a recognised university, he is not entitled for appointment on the post in question.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. This Court, in Subodh Kumar Verna v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 1995 DNJ (Raj.) 674 : [1994(7) SLR 395 (Raj.)], has held that the Degree of B.Ed. (Correspondence) obtained from Barkatullah Vishwavidhyalaya, Bhopal is recognised for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III and denial of appointment on that ground is erroneous and bad in law. The same view has been taken by the Coordinate Benches of this Court in Manish v. State of Rajasthan & ors., SBCWP No. 2444/1997 decided on 12.2.98 and Hanuman Ram & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., SBCWP No. 3126/1998 decided on 22.7.2003. In Hanumangarh Trained Teachers Sangharsh Samiti v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., WLR 1994 Raj. 701, yet another Coordinate Bench of this Court held that the B. Ed. Degree through correspondence course is a valid degree for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III.

6. Thus, in view of the aforesaid decisions of the Coordinate Benches of this Court, the B.Ed. Degree obtained by the petitioner through correspondence course from the aforesaid university is a valid and recognised B.Ed. Degree for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III.

7. The next question comes for consideration is : whether petitioner can be given appointment even after expiry of the select list. In Purshottam v. Chairman, M.S.E.B. & Anr., (1999)6 SCC 49 : [2000(1) SLR 62 (SC)], the Hon'ble Apex Court held that duly selected candidate could not be denied appointment on the pretext that panel's term had expired and the post had been filed by someone else. Such denial creates discrimination and is arbitrary and cannot be sustained. Similar view