1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3471/1995 Vasudev vs. RPSC & Anr. Date of order : 31/3/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri S.P. Sharma for the petitioner. Shri S.N. Kumawat for the respondent. ****** Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 9.3.1995 whereby the application of the petitioner for his candidature on the post of Analyst-cum- Programmer was rejected by the RPSC, Ajmer. The petitioner applied for appointment against the said post in the process of selection initiated by the respondent-RPSC in 1994. The RPSC rejected his candidature on the ground that he does not possess the requisite qualification for his appointment on the said post. According to the Rajasthan Computer State & Subordinate Services Rules, 1992, the post of Analyst-cum-Programmer is included at S.No.2 in Schedule-I appended thereto. The qualification for direct appointment is graduate from the University established by Law in India or a foreign 2 qualification recognised as equivalent thereto with Mathematics or Statistics or Computer Science with a formal training of 6 months in System Analysis and Design and Programming Languages or Master of Business Administration with specialization in systems. Shri S.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has obtained the degree of graduation in Commerce from the University of Rajasthan in 1987 with subjects of Accountancy and Business Statistics, Economic Administration and Finance Management and Business Administration and Banking Cooperation. He thereafter passed post graduate degree in Commerce from Kota Open University in 1990 in the subjects of Management Accounting and Financial Control, Business Statistics, Management and Operation Audit Economic Statistics in India and Advanced Costing Problems. It is contended that through out the study of graduation and post graduation both, the petitioner had Business Statics as one of the subjects which is nothing but another 3 name of Statistics. It is contended that the syllabus of both the subjects is the same but the subject has been given different names for different faculties. In sum and substance, the argument of the learned counsel is that Statistics in B.Com is the same as the Statistics in B.A. and B.Sc. courses, but petitioner has not only studied that subject at graduation level but also at post graduate level. Learned counsel referred to certificate issued by Registrar of University of Rajasthan dated 19.7.1995 verifying that the subject `Business Statistics' at graduate level in B.Com. is equivalent in contents to that of Statistics subject in the Faculty of Arts or Science. Learned counsel referred to the mark sheets of B.Com and M.Com. Shri S.N. Kumawat, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted that the subject of Business Statistics is materially different from the subject of Statistics as well as as per the advertisement issued by the respondents and also according to Rules of 1992, the subject that was required was of Statics and not of 4 Business Statistics. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner in fact was having subject of Accountancy and Business Statics in graduation whereas the Rules of 1992, requires the subject of Statics alone. Reference was made to comparative chart for the purpose of comparison between the syllabus of B.Com, B.Sc. and B.A. as mentioned in para 11 of the reply of the State and it was argued that the syllabus of subjects in these faculties is entirely different. Learned counsel submitted that the respondent-University by their letter dated 25.4.1997 has clarified that the contents of syllabus of the subject Statistics at B.A. / B.Sc. level are not the same to the subject of Accountancy and Business Statistics taught under the Faculty of Commerce at B.Com. level. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that the scheme of the Rule as evident from Schedule-I required the candidates to possess either Mathematics or Statics or Computer Science with a formal training of six months in System Analysis 5 and Design and Programming Languages. When the rule making authority has referred to only Statistics, the insistence of the petitioner that Accountancy and Business Statistics, since it contained the element `Statics', should be considered to mean `Statics' in the meaning of the aforesaid rule, cannot be accepted. The contention that Registrar of the University on application submitted by the petitioner has certified that subject `Business Statistics at graduation level in B.Com is equivalent in contents to that of Statistics, also subject in the Faculty of Arts or Science, also cannot be accepted. Even the contents of this letter even if its genuineness is not doubted, rather nullified by contents of another letter of Dy. Registrar of University of Rajasthan dated 25.4.1997. In any case, when the rule making authority has not intended to cover the subject `Business Statistics' in the Schedule appended to the Rules of 1992, this Court and for that matter, the University of Rajasthan by over stretching the meaning of word `Statistics', cannot seek to cover 6 `Business Statistics' into its Schedule. I therefore do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/