SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 1977

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SUDESH BANSAL, J.
 
Dashrath Chauhan S/o Shri Faker Singh Chauhan – Appellant 
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government Secretariat – Respondent 
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21426, 13665, 18393, 21364, 21410 of 2017
Decided on : 12-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Nishant Sharma Mr. Mahendra Sharma Mr. Akshit Gupta,
Ms. Pragya Seth, Mr. Shreyansh Dhariwal for Mr. Mahendra Shah, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ram Pratap Saini Mr. Amit Jindal Ms. Deepti Jindal Ms. Neetu Bhansali Mr. Sanjay Khedar Mr. Kartar Singh Fauzdar Mr. Saransh Saini Mr. G.S. Gauttam Mr. Ajay Gupta
For the Respondent: Mr. Sandeep Taneja, AAG with  Mr. Kartikeya Sharma, Mr. Aditya Sharma Mr. Sandeep Kumar Maheshwari Ms. Manju Joshi, AGC

The court affirmed that the equivalence of educational qualifications is a matter of State determination, limiting judicial review, while ensuring that unfilled vacancies warrant reconsideration of candidates' qualifications.

Headnote:(A) Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Records) Rules, 1957 - Qualifications for Patwari post - Recruitment under Advertisement dated 04.11.2015 - Petitioners possess computer qualifications deemed equivalent but were denied consideration - Court directs respondents to assess equivalence of qualifications with prescribed standard, maintaining vacancies for ex-servicemen - Acknowledges non-fulfillment of prescribed qualifications as per statutory rules - Legal rights under Articles 14, 16 & 21 claimed. (Paras 1, 6-7, 26).

(B) Judicial Review - Limitations of court's role in assessing equivalence of qualifications beyond prescribed norms - Court reiterates criteria for recruitment to be determined by State authority. (Paras 13-19).

(C) Decision-making in administrative recruitment processes based on qualifications assessed is subject to equity when vacancies remain. (Para 27).

Findings of Court:
Court directs the respondent-Board to seek the opinion from the Department of Personnel to evaluate the equivalence of petitioners' qualifications, with due consideration to remaining vacancies.

Issues: Whether the computer qualifications of petitioners are equivalent to those prescribed in the recruitment advertisement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored that equivalence of qualifications is primarily a matter for the State to determine; however, vacated posts mandate examination of petitioners' merits.

Result: Writ petitions disposed of with directions for assessment of qualifications.

Order :

SUDESH BANSAL, J.

1. The petitioners, in this batch of writ petitions, have appeared in the Written (Main Examination) conducted on 24.12.2016, for appointment on the post of Patwari through Direct Recruitment Examination-2015, pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.11.2015. The petitioners participated in the present recruitment under the category of 'ex-servicemen'. The issue raised by all the petitioners is of substantially, identical nature that they have acquired and possess equivalent qualification of computer education as required and prescribed for the post of Patwari, but their qualifications have not been considered by the respondents, merely on the ground that their qualifications do not fall within the prescribed qualification of Computer Education as indicated in the advertisement dated 04.11.2015. According to petitioners, the computer qualification acquired by them, is equivalent or higher than the prescribed qualification, therefore, candidature of the petitioners deserve to be considered for appointment on the post of Patwari on merits.

2. Since, question involved in respect of equivalence of computer qualification of petitioners, is substantially similar nature, with the consent of counsel for both the parties, all writ petitions have been heard together and would stand decided by this common order.

3. Relevant factual matrix, in nutshell, is that, vide Advertisement dated 04.11.2015 and amended advertisements, about 4426 vacancies of Patwari were notified, who after selection are required to be posted in the Department of Revenue, Government of Rajasthan. As per the said advertisement, recruitment for the post of Patwari is to be made as per the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Records) Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1957') and the Rajasthan Scheduled Area Subordinate Ministerial & Class-IV Services (Recruitment & Other Service Conditions) Rules, 2014. The requisite qualification for the post in question as prescribed in the advertisement, which is in consonance with the qualification as prescribed under Rule 273(4)(i) of the Rules of 1957 as amended vide Notification dated 12.08.2015, is as under:-

“(i) The applicant must have a working knowledge of Hindi written in Devnagri Script, knowledge of Rajasthan Culture and following qualifications, namely:-

(I) He must have passed the 10+2/ Senior Secondary School Examination or any other equivalent examination, recognized by the Government and (II) ‘O’ or higher level certificate course, conducted by the Department of Electronics Accrediation of Computer Course (DOEACC) under the control of the Department of Electronics, Government of India;

Or

Computer Operator and Programming Assistant (COPA)/ Data Preparation and Computer Software (DPCS) certificate course organized under the National Council on Vocational Training/ State Council on Vocational Training Scheme;

Or

Diploma in computer Scheme/ Computer Applications from a University established by law in India or from an Institution recognized by the Government;

Or

Diploma in Computer Science Course in Information Technology (RSCIT) conducted by Vardhman Mahaveer Open University, Kota under control of Rajasthan Knowledge Corporation Limited.”

vkosnu i= izLrqr djrs le; vkosnd dh fuEufyf[kr ;ksXrk,a gksuh pkfg,%&

1- vkosnd 10+2/ lhfu;j lSd.Mjh Ldwy ijh{kk mRrh.kZ ;k blds led{k vU; ijh{kk mRrh.kZ ftls ljdkj }kjk ekU;rk iznku dh gqbZ gS] vkSj

2- nsoukxjh fyfi esa fy[kh fgUnh esa dk;Z djus dk Kku ,oa jktLFkku dh laLd`fr dk Kku ,oa fuEukfdra ;ksX;rk,sa gksuk vko';d gS%&

3- Hkkjr ljdkj ds bysDVªksfuDl foHkkx ds fu;a=.kk/khu fMikVZesUV vkWQ bysDVªksfuDl ,ØhfMVs”ku vkWQ dEI;wVj dkslZ (DOEACC) }kjk vk;ksftr ^vks* ysoy ;k mPp Lrj dk izek.k i= ;k O;olkf;d izf'k{k.k ;kstuk ds jk"Vªh; ifj"kn¼us'kuy dkWfly½@jkT; ifjkn ¼LVsV dkWfly½ ds v/khu vk;ksftr dEI;wVj vkWijsVj ,oa izksxzkfeax vflLVsaV (COPA)/DATA rS;kjh vkSj dEI;wVj lkW¶Vos;j (DPCS) dkslZ dk izek.k&i=

;k

Hkkjr esa fof/k }kjk laLFkkfir fo'ofo|ky; ;k ljdkj }k











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top