S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7707/2008-Suresh Kumar Vishnoi vs. State of Raj. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 22/1/2009 1/3 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7707/2008 (Suresh Kumar Vishnoi vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) DATE OF ORDER : 22/1/2009 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Sukesh Bhati, for the petitioner. Mr.Anand Purohit along with Mr.Pappu Sangawan for the respondent. 1. By this writ petition, petitioner has prayed that he be considered for appointment to the post of GNM in pursuance of advertisement issued on 24/4/2008 vide Annex.1. Petitioner has claimed that though he passed Senior Secondary (Vocational) Course which was wrongly not treated as equivalent to Senior Secondary (Academic) Course and, therefore, though he was higher in merit, his case was ignored by the respondents for appointment to the said post. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy in this regard has been settled by the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in case of Panna Lal Joshi vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. - 2006 (6) RDD (Raj.) 3458. Relevant paras 16 and 18 of the said judgment are quoted below: “16. Coming to the merit of the case, it appears to us that to the extent a person who has passed Senior Secondary (Vocational) Course has to be treated as eligible on its own force without referring his other qualifications of Senior Secondary (Academic) and the Bridge Course for considering his eligibility if the S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7707/2008-Suresh Kumar Vishnoi vs. State of Raj. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 22/1/2009 2/3 recruitment to posts in question is concluded by the decision of Supreme Court. In that event, the petitioner is entitled to claim determination of his merit on the basis of his marks in Senior Secondary (Vocational) examination itself without recourse to marks obtained in Bridge Course which does not fall within the ambit of necessary qualification. It is not a case that the person is required to hold both the qualifications i.e, Senior Secondary (Vocational) as well as Senior Secondary (Academic). If a person is holding the only qualification of Senior Secondary (Academic) the requirement of having a bridge course d was additional to it. In that event considering the marks obtained at Higher Secondary or Bridge Course together may be considered. However, When Secondary Senior (Vocational) Course itself is complete required qualification one cannot be denied merit by referring to marks obtained in bridge course. 18. As a result this appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal is set aside. The writ petition is allowed. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are directed to consider the case of the petitioner-appellant for appointment, if on the basis of his marks obtained in the Senior Secondary (Vocational) and by excluding the consideration of marks obtained in optional subjects in Bridge Course he finds place in order of merit in accordance with the directions issued in Vinod Kumar's case.” 3. Reply to the writ petition has been filed by Mr.Anand Purohit, Addl. Advocate General appearing for the respondents and S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7707/2008-Suresh Kumar Vishnoi vs. State of Raj. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 22/1/2009 3/3 respondents fairly do not dispute the position so far as controversy involved in the case is concerned. Senior Secondary (Vocational) has to be treated at par with Senior Secondary (Academic) Course and, therefore, petitioner's case was required to be considered. 4. In view of aforesaid Division Bench Judgment of this Court, the controversy is not longer res integra and controversy is covered by the said judgment of Division Bench. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and respondents are directed to consider the case of petitioner for appointment to the post of GNM within a period of 15 days from today since the period of advertisement Annex.1 dated 24/4/2008 is only for one year which may expire soon. No order as to costs. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. item no.35 baweja/-