CW 1747/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** 1- Civil Writ Petition No.1747/2008 Laxmi Narania Versus State & (4) Ors. 2- Civil Writ Petition No.1752/2008 Sumitra Kumari Versus State & (4) Ors. 3- Civil Writ Petition No.1741/2008 Ati Kulhari Versus State & (4) Ors. 4- Civil Writ Petition No.1740/2008 Sunita Lamba Versus State & (4) Ors. 5- Civil Writ Petition No.1748/2008 Shobha MeenaVersus State & (4) Ors. 6- Civil Writ Petition No.1749/2008 Beema Kumari Versus State & (4) Ors. 7- Civil Writ Petition No.1750/2008 Suman K.Meena Versus State & (4) Ors. 8- Civil Writ Petition No.1751/2008 Om Kala Versus State & (4) Ors. 9- Civil Writ Petition No.1696/2008 Anita Tanwar Versus State & (4) Ors. 10- Civil Writ Petition No.2114/2008 Anuradha & Shika Kataria Versus State & (5) Ors. 11- Civil Writ Petition No.3043/2008 Sushila Kumari Versus State & (4) Ors. 12- Civil Writ Petition No.4812/2008 Mamta Kumari Versus State & (4) Ors. Date of Order ::: 28/05/08 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Advocates : Sarva Shri Rajendra Soni, Ashok Bansal, Ram P. Saini, Mrs Usha Devi for Mr.IR Saini, for petitioners Mr. SN Kumawat, for respondent RPSC Ms Sweta Pareek for Mr. Sanjay Pareek, for respondent-NCTE Mr. JKAgrawal, Addl.Govt. Advocate for respondents State. At joint request, since identical issues are involved, hence these petitions were finally heard and are being disposed of at admission stage by common order. These petitions are basically filed by petitioners with the grievance that after being CW 1747/08 //2// selected as Primary school Teacher, their services were illegally terminated by respondents who have filed their reply in some of petitions and inter- alia submits that petitioners were holding qualification of Nursery Teachers Training Course which is not equivalent to BSTC course, therefore, are not eligible for appointment against posts of Primary School Teacher. However, a letter has been issued by respondents on 25/04/08 (Ann.R/1) for having taken decision that such like persons including petitioners who were appointed as Primary School Teachers, be retained on consolidated sum of Rs.2,750/- in course of training to undergo six months bridge course and after qualifying the same, they would be allowed to continue in service. As informed, petitioners have also submitted their respective bonds to the satisfaction of respondents in terms of letter dt. 25/04/08 (Ann.R.1). Counsel for petitioners does not dispute this fact but submits that since all of them are regularly selected through public service commission upon having participated in process of selection in pursuance of advertisement dt.30/10/06, and now are being fixed on consolidated sum of Rs.2,750/- per month and if bridge course training takes some times, it would CW 1747/08 //3// cause prejudice to each of them. Keeping in view the dispute being resolved by respondents vide letter dt.25/04/08 (Ann.R.1), this Court does not examine merits in respective petitions; however, after they were regularly selected, are now being called upon to undergo bridge course training, which may rule out impediment considered by respondents at one stage, it is expected from the respondents that they may hold bridge course training at the earliest possible and grant admission to each of petitioners in ensuing session of bridge course which may commence in near future without any delay. With the directions (supra) and in terms of letter dt.25/04/08 (Ann.R.1), all these petitions stand disposed of. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.3/1747CW08-2805nttc.doc