Summary
A widow seeking an LDC post acquired the required computer qualification after the original and extended recruitment deadlines. The Court held that the 2017 notice merely resumed the 2013 recruitment and did not reopen eligibility. Rule 266-A, concerning regularization of women already appointed as teachers after specified qualification relaxation, could not assist an applicant never appointed. Sympathy could not justify appointment contrary to the governing requirements. The State’s appeal was allowed and the writ petition dismissed.
Issues
- Whether resumption of an earlier recruitment allowed a candidate to rely on a qualification acquired after its eligibility deadlines.
- Whether Rule 266-A or the cited earlier High Court decision entitled the applicant to relaxation.
Provisions considered
- Rule 266-A, Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996The indispensable requirement of an existing appointment was absent; the rule’s specified teacher-training qualifications also differed from the RSCIT qualification at issue. (¶¶ 9, 11-12)
Held
- The 2017 advertisement continued the 2013 selection rather than inviting a fresh recruitment with a new eligibility date. Only candidates qualified under the earlier requirements, including the extended period, could be considered. The applicant’s acquisition of RSCIT in 2014 did not cure her 2013 ineligibility. (¶¶ 1-4, 10, 12)
- Rule 266-A contemplated regularizing widows or divorcees already appointed as teachers after relaxation of BSTC or B.Ed. qualifications. Even assuming possible application to another post, the applicant had never been appointed and therefore lacked an indispensable condition. The rule did not address the computer qualification involved here. (¶¶ 9, 11)
- The earlier High Court judgment concerned the validity of a different rule and merely permitted representations for relaxation of experience, to be sympathetically considered by the competent authority. It did not grant the present applicant an entitlement to qualification relaxation or appointment. (¶¶ 9, 12)
- Public employment must conform to the governing law. Widowhood and sympathy did not justify directing consideration of a candidate lacking the essential qualification by the applicable date. The State’s appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment set aside and the writ petition dismissed without costs. (¶ 13-14)
Result
State’s appeal allowed; impugned judgment set aside and writ petition dismissed. Later acquisition of RSCIT did not establish eligibility in the resumed recruitment. No costs.