Back
Next 
judgement
2024-07-10
Subject: Constitutional Law - Equality and Non-Discrimination
The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark judgment in a batch of 47 appeals, upholding the Rajasthan government's decision to grant bonus marks and age relaxation to teachers with experience in educational projects. The case arose from the selection process for the post of "Prabodhak" (teacher) in Rajasthan, which was governed by the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008.
The appellants, who were teachers in recognized educational institutions, challenged the award of excess bonus marks to candidates with project experience. They also argued that the age relaxation granted to project-employed applicants was discriminatory and violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
The state government, on the other hand, contended that the projects were designed to address the issue of teacher absenteeism and poor enrollment in rural areas. The experience gained by the project-employed teachers was valuable and had a reasonable nexus with the role of a Prabodhak.
The Supreme Court found that the age relaxation provided in Rule 13(v) of the Prabodhak Service Rules was not arbitrary or discriminatory. The court recognized that the project-employed teachers formed a separate class with distinct experience and that the differential treatment had a rational relation to the objective of the Prabodhak post.
Regarding the award of bonus marks, the court held that the guidelines issued before the advertisement were a valid exercise of the state's power. The court found that the additional marks for project experience were not arbitrary and had a reasonable nexus with the nature of the Prabodhak's work.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the state's decision to grant bonus marks and age relaxation to project-experienced teachers in the Prabodhak selection process. The court held that the measures were not discriminatory and were in line with the objectives of the Prabodhak cadre.
This judgment is a significant victory for the Rajasthan government's efforts to improve access to education in rural areas and recognizes the valuable experience gained by teachers in educational projects. It also sets an important precedent for the use of affirmative action measures in public employment, where the differential treatment is justified by the unique circumstances and objectives of the recruitment process.
Family Judge Exposes Weaponized Litigation in Custody Dispute
14 Feb 2026
Centre Notifies Two High Court Chief Justice Appointments
16 Feb 2026
Deep Chandra Joshi Appointed Acting NCLT President
16 Feb 2026
Debunking the Myth That Indians Lack Privacy Concepts
16 Feb 2026
Whose View Is It Anyway? Juniors Uncredited
16 Feb 2026
Private Property Disputes Not Human Rights Violations; HRC Lacks Jurisdiction Under PHRA: Gujarat HC
16 Feb 2026
Supreme Court Rejects Stay on RTI Data Amendments
16 Feb 2026
DIFC Court: Strong Reasons Required to Block Arbitration
17 Feb 2026
Bar Leaders Oppose High Courts Saturday Sittings
17 Feb 2026
The main legal point established in the judgment is that age relaxation and the award of bonus marks to project-employed applicants were found to be valid and non-discriminatory under the Rajasthan P....
Entitlement to bonus marks under the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 and the interpretation of the same in light of relevant case law.
The State Government has the discretion to extend weightage to a particular class serving in the State of Rajasthan only, and such discretion cannot be deemed discriminatory or arbitrary.
The court upheld the age limit of 40 years for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to established guidelines to prevent arbitrariness and ensure equality in public employment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that age relaxation for candidates and the calculation of weightage for employment exchange seniority should be in accordance with the Recruitment ....
The main legal point established is that the petitioner was entitled to age relaxation and bonus marks as per the Rules of 1965 and the Circular/letter dated 08.02.2016, despite the rejection of his ....
Retirement policies cannot be applied retroactively to employees who have already retired, highlighting the need for uniform application to avoid discrimination among similarly situated individuals.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the petitioner to age relaxation similar to other candidates, as supported by the Constitution of India, Article 226, and rel....
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
