JUDGMENT :

ARUN BHANSALI, J.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner as per his degree/diploma in Computer Application from the recognized University/Institute with all consequential benefits.

2. Further relief has been sought that the respondents be directed to accord appointment to the petitioner on the post of LDC in the category of SC, male in District Sirohi, pursuant to the advertisement 2013.

3. Advertisement dated 14.02.2013 (Annexure-1), was issued for appointment to the post of LDC. The advertisement inter alia indicated the minimum educational qualification and provided that the applicant must have obtained the qualification on the last date of filing the application.

4. The petitioner applied pursuant to the said advertisement and relied on a qualification, whereby, he had obtained diploma in Computer Application from National Institute of Computer Education (NICE). However, apparently on account of the said diploma having not been recognized by the respondent-State, after document verification the name of the petitioner did not appear in the list of selected candidates.

5. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner approached the respondents relying on a diploma in Computer Application given by Calorx Teachers' University, Ahmedabad. However, the same was not taken into consideration. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the circulars 30.10.2017 and 26.12.2017 issued by the respondents, wherein, directions were issued for taking into consideration qualification, which was though not relied on by the candidates at the time of filling up the application form but had been obtained by the candidates prior to the cut off date i.e. June, 2013.

7. It is submitted that as the respondents themselves have indicated that the qualification has to be taken into consideration, as the qualification relied on by the petitioner is recognized as per the advertisement, the petitioner is entitled to relief as prayed for.

8. Further submissions have been made that the only objection indicated in reply to the writ petition is that the document was not produced at the time of document verification and that the respondents never got opportunity to verify the said document and, therefore, the appointment could not be given on the said basis.

9. It is submitted that in view of the circulars issued by the respondents providing another opportunity, the plea raised in this regard has no basis. It was prayed that the writ petition be allowed and the respondents be directed to do the needful.

10. Learned counsel appearing for the State, vehemently, opposed the submissions.

11. It was inter alia submitted that admittedly the petitioner did not rely on the qualification which is now sought to be projected, at the time of filling up the application form. Further attention was drawn towards the certificate, which was issued on 20.04.2016 and it was submitted that once the document was not in possession of the petitioner at the time of filing of the application/at the time of scrutiny, he is not entitled to rely on the said qualification and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

12. Reliance has been placed on judgment in Radha Chaudhary v. State of Rajasthan : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13027/2013, decided on 04.05.2017 and Ramesh Chandra Meena v. State of Rajasthan : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13367/2013, decided on 24.11.2017.

13. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record, the facts are not in dispute, wherein, the petitioner at the time of filing of the application, relied on a qualification which was not recognized by the respondents. The respondents, during the course of the recruitment process, issued various circulars including circular dated 30.10.2017, 25.12.2017 and 11.