Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
SAMEER JAIN
KAMLESH PRASAD MEENA AND ORS – Appellant
Versus
STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENTORS – Respondent
Judgment
19/03/2025
1. Considering the identical factual narrative, the issue in hand and with consensus of the learned counsel for the parties, the instant petitions are adjudicated vide this common judgment; the same shall be made applicable on mutatis mutandis basis upon the petitions herein.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the present petitions are filed in connection with the advertisement dated 09.09.2008 issued by the respondents for recruitment on the post of Physical Training Instructors (P.T.I.) Gr.II & III. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in pursuance to the said advertisement, a revised select list dated 14.01.2013 was issued and the candidature of the petitioners was rejected, merely due to the reason that the petitioners are in possession three years course of B.P.Ed./B.P.E. which is not as per the minimum eligibility issued by the respondents for the post of PTI Gr.II.
3. Being aggrieved of the aforementioned, the petitioners have filed representations dated 27.12.2013 however, respondent- RPSC rejected the representations of the petitioners vide order dated 12.05.2014, stating that as per guidelines of State
Point of Law : Similarly, for category number (c) also the Note-3 comes into operation only if a candidate possesses more than 50% marks in graduation, because otherwise a candidate falling in this c....
The court upheld the rejection of the petitioner's candidature as her MA (P.Ed) was not equivalent to the required M.P.Ed, confirming the necessity of adhering to specified qualifications in recruitm....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
