HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISOARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (St N0. 4035 OF 2008 PET!TIONERS 1. Dinesh Kumar Rathore, S^o Shri Ram Krishna Rathoro, agod about 30 years, R/o Champa Road, Naharpul, Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). 2. Smt. Rukmani Rathore, W/o Shn Gyaneshwar Singh Rathore, aged about 34 years, R/o NH-7, Hasdeo Vihar CoSony, Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). 3 Manoj Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Mahesh Ram Sahu, aged about 28 years, R/o viilage Datoud, Post Office Kotetara, Tahsil Jajjaipur, Disft. Janjgir-Champa (CG). 4. Smt. Jai Shree Sahu, VWo Shri Manoj Kumar Sahu, aged about 26 years, R/o village Datoud, Post OfRce Kotetara, Tahsii JaEjaipur, Distl. Janjgir-Champa (CG). 5. Smt. Sangeeta Sahu, W/o Shri Manoj Kurnar Sahu, aged about 30 years, R/o C/o Shiv Charan Singh, Link Road, Shjv Mandir Gaii, Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). ©. Smt. Sandhya Sahu, W/o Shri Vlnod Kumar Sahu, aged about 32 years, R/o Near Pithampur Chowk, Khokhsa (Jsnjgir), Post Offic®, Khokhsa, Tahsii Jangir, Disrt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). Versus RESPONDENTS 1. State of ChhattisQarh, Through Secretary, Department of Panchayat, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2. The Collector, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). 3. The Chief Executjve Officer, Office of District Panchayat, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). ftA^rit petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bersch : Hon'ble Shri Satssh K. Agnjhotri, J. Present: Shri Ani! Slngh Rajput, counse! for the petltioners. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. Advocate Generai for State/respondersts No.1 & 2. -2^' ORALORD^R . ' (Passed on this 28th day ofJuSy, 2008) With the consent of Searned counsel appearing for the partles, the petitjon is heardfinally. 2) The petltjoners. by this petition, seek quashment of Annexure-P/4 1 e the select !ist of Shiksha Karmi Grade-11 (Arts^Sdence group). 3) The facts, jn nutsheli, are that pursuant to the advertisement dated 14-1-2008 (Annexure-P^l) issued by the Ztla Panchayat, .lanjglr-Champa, the petitloners applicatlons for eppojntment on the of Shiteha Karmj Grade-it. The petitioners, in ^dclltEon to thelr graduation In Arts^Science are also having degree of Shlksha (Vlsharad) from Hindi Sahitya Sammeian. Prayag, Allahabad. 4) learnedl counse! appearing for the petitloners submlts that the degree of Shjkshgi ^/jsharadl) is equlvalent to Bachelor of Education (B.EcS.) examination certificate. The names of the petitioners found pjace In the select !ist pulbiished in the month of May/June, 2008. The respondent No.3, on seiectlon, dict not find the petitioners as eljgjble for appointment, as the required document i e. B Eci. certificate was not in their possessson. They obtasned Shiksha (Visharad) from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag, Allahabad and that was not treated as equivaSent to R.,Fd. Thereafter, the petltioners m-ade representations the respondent authorities, which is stlll pending consideratjon. 5) Adnilttedly, the petitioners do not possess the. B'.Ed.. degree certlfjcate, whlch js the essentia? qyaliflcatlon for appointment on the.post of Bhjksha Karml Gr^de-SS in to grad.uation InArts/Sclence group, 6) l.earned counsel for the petitjoners sishmit? that Shtksha (Vjsharad) certificate (Annexure-Pir2) granted by Hinri? Sahitya Sammeian, Prayag, Aljahabad, Is equiva.lent to B.Ed. degree. learned counse! further on a ietter dated 20-5-1988 (Annexure-P/7) wntten to the Principal, Sarsawati Viriya Mandir. !If/A, Bokaro Stee! City,BJhar from the Central Board of Secondary Edycation, Delhi, wherejn tt observed that "as per Hlnd Raok for Personne! Oflicers, Government of India, the [jnjversjty 15 mcognized, as such the'person B.Eri. Degr^e frf.m Hjndi Sahjtya Saninielan, Prayag, , Is to as f^.^fkh^r " 7) .Learnecl counsel for th^ fitate/respondents NoJ & 2 ^iihmjts th^t fhe d^groe of Shjksh^ A^sha^d) js not. recog^i^ed by the 1 ,,>^- ..? <s-' v.v. '^^-" ^ -3 Gowri 3^te Oovernm^nt as'B.,Ed. degree. Ap^rt from th^t, the R,.Ed, has tn he recognteeri not fr^m the Centra! Ro^rri ^ Secondary.Edi.ication, 'byt hv th^ N^tionas Coimeii for Teacher^ Edisca4'i^n the Detitloners. have not proriyoed any docyment indicating thelr degree Is recognteed by thft hSationai Council for Teachers Educatlon. 8) The petltloners have not produced documents to come to a partlcuSar concSusion. Thus, the petltion is devoid of merit, however, the pendlng represetnaiton of the petitioners may be considered by the authoritles jn accordance wjth )aw. 9) !n view of the foregojng, the petition stands disposed of. No order astocosts. 10) Consequently, appiication (t.A,No.1/2008) for grant of stay aiso standsdlsposecl of. ———-- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge M