1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10681/2009 Mesa Ram Thori. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10681/2009 Mesa Ram Thori. vs. State of Rajasthan and others. DATE OF ORDER: 21.11.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.NR Choudhary, for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Bhati for Mr.RL Jangid,AAG, for the respondents. ------ Learned counsel Mr.Rajesh Bhati appears for all the respondents and at the request of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is finally heard and decided. The petitioner's candidature was rejected on the ground that the petitioner was not possessing the requisite qualification of passing senior secondary examination at the time of last date for submission of the application in pursuance of the notice inviting application for the post of Prabhodak vide notice dated 31.5.2008. 2 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10681/2009 Mesa Ram Thori. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. The facts of the case are that the petitioner took certificate of BAP i.e. Bachelor of Art Preparatory Programme in the year 2004 after passing secondary education. Then, the petitioner passed BSTC in the year 2007. The petitioner was a student of Senior Secondary and his result was declared on 10.6.2008 wherein he was given chance to appear in the supplementary examination. The result of supplementary examination of the petitioner was declared on 25.9.2008 and he was declared passed. Meaning thereby, he passed the Senior Secondary Examination in the academic session 2007-2008. However, meanwhile, the last date for submission of the application form was fixed as 26.6.2008. Therefore, the petitioner could not claim that he passed the senior secondary examination as on 26.6.2008. However, the petitioner was allowed to face the interview but his appointment has been denied on the ground that on or before 26.6.2008, he was not the candidate with senior secondary examination pass. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted 3 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10681/2009 Mesa Ram Thori. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. that for NTT and for other education and for bridge course, time has been granted for the candidates to complete the said courses and that has not been treated as bar against appointment. It is submitted that the declaration of result of senior secondary was not in the control of the petitioner and if the petitioner's result would have been declared prior to 26.6.2008, then he would have been eligible for the post of Prabhodak. It is submitted that the petitioner was a student of the year 2007-2008 for senior secondary course and appeared in the examination before the cut out date fixed in the advertisement dated 31.5.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Division Bench of this Court in several matters allowed the candidates to submit representation where they got supplementary in BSTC course and their results were declared subsequently declaring them passed. It is submitted that in view of the Division bench judgment delivered in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.923/2008 (Ganpat Singh & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 26.4.2009, the 4 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10681/2009 Mesa Ram Thori. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. petitioner's candidature also requires to be considered. In view of the reasoning given in the judgment of Division Bench in Ganpat Singh's case (supra), this writ petition is also allowed and the petitioner is granted permission to file appropriate representation before the respondents who will consider the petitioner's representation after taking into account the fact that the petitioner was already declared passed in Senior Secondary examination for the session 2007-2008 and may pass appropriate order. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya/-