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

2007 Supreme(P&H) 1955

JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, SHAM SUNDER
Renu Kanwar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent


Judgment

J.S.Khehar, J.

1. In furtherance of the directions issued by this Court, the author of the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 3 is also present in Court in person. The issue to be adjudicated upon is, whether or not the petitioner Renu Kanwar is eligible for competing in the process of selection for appointment against the post of Resource Teacher. According to the learned counsel representing respondent No. 3, the petitioner is ineligible as she does not fulfil the essential qualifications stipulated in the advertisement (Annexure P-5), whereas according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner fulfils all essential qualifications stipulated in the advertisement (Annexure P-5).

2. We have perused Annexure P-5. The essential qualifications for eligibility have been depicted therein as under :-

"Qualifications"

Essential :

1. Should have passed +2 class examination or equivalent, and

2. Should possess a recognized degree/diploma/certificate in the education of

a. Visually impaired or

b. Hearing impaired or

7. Mentally challenged.

Desirable :

3. Should possess at least one years experience of teaching visually disabled, hearing impaired and/o













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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top