IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
REKHA BORANA, J.
Seema Pal D/o Shri Kali Charan Pal – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7274 of 2020
Decided On : 13-10-2022
Experience Certificate - Appointment to the post of Headmaster, Secondary School - Advertisement dated 28.03.2018 - [Smt. Sangeeta Choudhary vs. State of Rajasthan and Others, S.B. Civil Writ No. 2998/2016 decided on 05.12.2016, Naveen Patidar vs. State of Rajasthan and Others, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10729/2018 decided on 03.01.2020] - The court considered the validity of the experience certificate dated 10.08.2019 and its modification, the principles of natural justice, and the consequences of a previous judgment in favor of the petitioner. The court held that the petitioner possessed the required work experience and directed the authorities to consider the earlier experience certificate and issue the posting order in her favor on the post of Headmaster with immediate effect.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought consideration of her experience certificate for appointment as Headmaster, Secondary School. The experience certificate dated 10.08.2019 was initially accepted, but later modified, leading to the cancellation of her appointment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner possessed the required work experience and that the modification of the experience certificate without notice to the petitioner violated principles of natural justice. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned communication, and directed the authorities to consider the earlier experience certificate and issue the posting order in her favor.
Issues: Validity of the experience certificate, principles of natural justice, consequences of a previous judgment in favor of the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if there is a specific direction for the services of a candidate to be considered continuous and benefits to be given from a certain date, all benefits would relate back to that date. The court also emphasized the importance of considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the impugned communication was quashed, and the authorities were directed to consider the earlier experience certificate and issue the posting order in favor of the petitioner.
ORDER :
1. The present petition has been filed with a prayer for consideration of the experience certificate dated 10.08.2019 for the purposes of appointment to the post of Headmaster, Secondary School in pursuance to the advertisement dated 28.03.2018.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press prayer No. A as made in the writ petition vide which it has been prayed that condition No. 3 of point No. 2 of the qualifications provided under the advertisement dated 28.03.2018 be quashed.
3. The case of the petitioner is that she joined as Teacher Grade-III with the respondent-Department on 10.09.2013 and is working as such since her date of joining. Vide the advertisement dated 28.03.2018, the applications for the appointment to the post of Headmaster, Secondary School were invited by the respondent-Department and she too applied in pursuance to the said advertisement. The essential qualification required for the post of Headmaster was minimum 5 years’ teaching experience in any school. It was further the condition of the advertisement that the teaching experience as required should have been obtained by the candidates before the last date of submission of the application form and then only the person would be eligible for the appointment. The other condition of the advertisement was that the experience certificate counter signed by the District Education Officer would only be acceptable for the purposes.
4. Admittedly, in petitioner’s application form, the experience period mentioned by her was for the period from 10.09.2013 to 21.05.2018 i.e. 56 months. However, the petitioner participated in the recruitment process and was even selected. During the document verification she submitted the experience certificate dated 10.08.2019 (for the period from 11.09.2012 to 30.05.2018) issued to her and counter signed by the authorized officer which was accepted and she found place even in the final select list dated 23.09.2019. After the final select list being issued, the candidates were called for counselling for posting purposes and even in that order dated 16.10.2019, petitioner’s name found place. However, before any appointment order could be issued in favour of the petitioner, communication dated 18.12.2019 was issued by the Joint Director addressed to the District Education Officer whereby it was directed that the actual experience gained by the petitioner would commence from her actual date of appointment i.e. 10.09.2013 and therefore, the experience certificate issued to her w.e.f. 11.09.2012 cannot be held to be correct and the same be modified. In pursuance to the communication dated 18.12.2019, a new experience certificate dated 10.01.2002 was issued pertaining to the period from 10.09.2013 to 30.05.2018 i.e. for a period of 4 years 8 months and 21 days. Because of the said experience certificate, the petitioner was not held to be entitled to be appointed as Headmaster as she had not completed the required five years of experience and consequently her candidature was cancelled. Aggrieved against the same the present petition has been filed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the communication dated 18.12.2019 is totally bad in the eyes of law as earlier by virtue of judgment dated 15.02.2019 passed in a writ petition preferred by the petitioner (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1310/2019), it was specifically directed that the petitioner would be treated senior to the persons junior to her in merit list and in pursuance to the said judgment notional benefits were granted to her by the Department vide order dated 22.10.2019 w.e.f. 11.09.2012 i.e. the date the person junior to her was appointed. Learned counsel submitted that when once the notional benefits had been granted to her in pursuance to the specific directions of the Court, the said date would only be the effective date for all purposes including her seniority as well as the experience. Therefore, the experience certificate dated 10.08.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of a case, the principles of natural justice, and the consequences of a previous....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the experience certificate should be considered valid, and the decision not to award marks for the petitioner's experience was not sustainable....
Teaching experience certified by government school Principal qualifies for recruitment marks despite unauthorized PTA/SMC appointment; equity protects selected candidate's regularized service while g....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to consider experience certificates and the principles of natural justice in determining eligibility for the post of Laboratory Ass....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.