[2025:RJ-JP:46932]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16756/2025 Vijaylata Sharma D/o Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, Aged About 37 Years, R/o C/o Harimohan Sharma, Plot No. 09, Tara Nagar, Jagatpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, State Agriculture Management Institute, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Director, Primary Education And Panchayat Raj, (Primary Education), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Jain Mr. Rishi Raj Maheshwari Ms. Apurva Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nalin G. Narayan Mr. Saumil Sharma for Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

20/11/2025

1. Instant civil writ petition is preferred by the petitioner with following prayer:-

“i. By an appropriate, writ order or direction, the petitioner may be considered for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III (HI) Level-II) Science-Maths (Special Education) (Hearing Impairment) pursuant to the advertisement notification dated 16.12.2022 and the order/result dated 08.01.2025 may be quashed and set aside to the extent of non-consideration of the candidature of Petitioner, albeit scoring higher merit position.

ii. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, Respondents may be directed to consider the Petitioner for appointment with all consequential benefits including actual financial benefits.

iii. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the writ petition may be allowed in terms of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. V.s. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 8140/2024 decided on 24.09.2025 (Annexure-10).

iv. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Mr. Nalin G. Narayan, put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2 whereas Saumil Sharma on behalf of Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 and 3.

3. Office is directed to reflect name of Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC and Mr. Nalin G. Narayan in the cause list as counsel for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that similar controversy has traveled up to Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. : Civil Appeal No(s). 8140/2024 decided on 24.09.2025 and the issue was resolved. Learned counsel has prayed that this writ petition be disposed of on same terms also.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that if ratio is applicable in the facts and circumstances then they will consider the case of the petitioner but in case of deviation, they will appropriately decide the representation submitted to them by the petitioner having considered aforesaid and also on perused of judgment in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra).

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court n case of Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra)has observed as under:-

“10. The short issue arising for consideration is whether the qualification of the appellants, who possess a B.Ed. (General Education) along with a post-graduate professional diploma in Special Education, is equivalent to the prescribed qualification, i.e., graduation and B.Ed. (Special Education).

11. The answer to this question is simple and straightforward for the following reasons;

a. It is an admitted fact that the advertisement which is issued is intended for the recruitment of Special Education Teachers. Recruitment of teachers intended for special education is governed by the RCI Act, a special statute, the regulator of which is the Rehabilitation Council of India, which has a statutory status.

b. Th