ORDER :

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) on 2.8.2013 issued an advertisement calling applications for appointment to the post of School Lecturer in the subject of Rajasthani. The eligibility prescribed was a Post Graduate in the subject including as obtained before the commencement of the written examination for the selection. This was in consonance with Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Educational Service Rules, 1970 (hereafter ‘Rules of 1970’).

2. The petitioner a member of the Scheduled Tribe, at the relevant time in the final year of Masters in Rajasthani Language Literature & Culture, having applied pursuant to the advertisement in issue was admitted to the written examination for selection as School Lecturer in Rajasthani. That she was so eligible to apply both under the advertisement dated 2.8.2013 and also in terms of Rule 11 of the Rules of 1970 is not in dispute. The examination for selection to the post of School Lecturer (Rajasthani) entailed writing two papers i.e. one in General Knowledge held on 12.7.2014 and the other in the subject of Rajasthani held on 17.7.2014. The petitioner was apparently successful, being at merit no.22, was entitled to be appointed against the vacancy reserved for the Scheduled Tribe category to the post of School Lecturer. But on document verification, the respondents held that she did not fulfill the requisite eligibility on the date as required under the advertisement dated 2.8.2013 and/ or Rule 11 of the Rules of 1970. That view of the respondents has resulted in this petition.

3. Appearing for the petitioner Mr.Shobhit Tiwari, submits that the respondents have acted arbitrarily and mechanically in holding that the petitioner lacked the requisite educational qualification of M.A. Rajasthani Language Literature & Culture on the record date as per the advertisement and Rule 11 of the Rules of 1970. He submitted that as admittedly the second of the two papers at the written examination for selection as School Lecturer (Rajasthani) was held on 17.7.2014, when the petitioner’s pass result of M.A. (Final) Rajasthani Language Literature & Culture was also declared as evident from the mark-sheet issued by the University of Rajasthan on 18.8.2014, the petitioner had the requisite educational qualification on the record date— notwithstanding the fact that formal proof thereof came later. And hence in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur in the case of The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer vs. Shobha Mutha & Others D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.674/2016 and other connected matters, decided on 5.1.2017, the petitioner was entitled to be appointed on the reserved post of School Lecturer (Rajasthani) as per her merit.

4. Mr.Ganesh Meena, AAG for the State and Mr.M.F. Baig for RPSC not in a position to contest the judgment of the Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur in the case of Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer vs. Shobha Mutha & Others (supra) submitted that yet even with reference thereto, proof of the petitioner’s eligibility of having passed M.A. Rajasthani Language Literature & Culture came with the University’s marksheet dated 18.8.2014. That was way beyond 17.7.2014 when the last of the two written examinationS for appointment to the post of School Lecturer (Rajasthani) was held. That situation did not satisfy, Mr.Ganesh Meena and Mr.M.F. Baig submitted the statutory requirement of the clause (iii) of the proviso to Rule 11 of the Rules of 1970 of the candidate i.e. the petitioner submitting “proof of having acquired the requisite educational qualification to the appropriate selection agency” at the time when the second and final paper for selection to the post of School Lecturer (Rajasthani) was held on 17.7.2014.

5. Heard. Considered.

6. The Division Bench of this Court while dismissing RPSC’s Special Appeal against Shobha Mutha and Others (supra) has interpreted clause (iii) of the proviso to Rule 11 of the Rules