1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.2547/2004. : : Sultan Singh Kajla Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. : : Date of Order 22.9.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.Hanuman Choudhary for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Sharma, Govt. Counsel for the State. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that the respondents be directed to consider the qualification of Senior Secondary (Vocational) as the petitioner is eligible for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III in handicapped category on the basis of Senior Secondary (Vocational) qualification and be further directed to give appointment pursuant to advertisement No.2003- 04/1250-94 dated 10.9.2003. Shri Hanuman Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner has cited the judgment passed by this Court in Ramraj Tada Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SB Civil Writ Petition No.4005/08) decided on 8.8.2008. According to the 2 petitioner he secured 74.71% marks on the basis of his Senior Secondary (Vocational) and the last appointed candidate secured 74% marks only. It is argued that neither in the advertisement nor in the rules, it has been provided that candidate having Senior Secondary (Vocational) qualification would be required to pass Bridge Course. Shri S.S.Sharma, learned Government Counsel has contested the writ petition and argued that as per the Government instructions dated 10.9.2003, the qualification of Senior Secondary (Vocational) cannot be accepted as conferring eligibility upon the petitioner. It is only after he passes bridge course that he can be considered as eligible. The respondents have assessed the merit of the petitioner by giving weightage of 75% to the bridge course and 25% to the vocational course and on that basis prepared the merit. According to which the merit of the petitioner was 70.92%. The controversy involved in this case came up for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Ramraj Tada (supra), with reference to circular issued by the Government, in the context of vacancies 98-99. It was held that candidates holding qualification of Senior Secondary 3 (Vocational) would be considered eligible for appointment as Primary School Teacher. The Court referred to judgment of Division Bench in Kailash Chand Harijan Vs. State of Rajasthan : 2006 (4) WLC, 377 and the subsequent amendment in the rules made by the Government. The Court also analyzed the effect of the provisions of National Council for Teaching Education (NCTE) Act, 1993 and held that NCTE alone is competent for imparting education under NCTE Act. If the NCTE has not been made any distinction between Senior Secondary (Academic) and Senior Secondary (Vocational), the State Government or its recruiting agency was not competent to make such distinction between Senior Secondary (Academic) and Senior Secondary (Vocational) to hold that those possessing Senior Secondary (Vocational) are not eligible. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Division Bench in Panna Lal Joshi Vs. State : 2006 (6) RDD 3458, which was based on the decision of Supreme Court in Sunita Sharma Vs. State : 2001 (10) JT (SC) 178 holding Senior Secondary (Vocational) examination as equivalent to the Senior Secondary (Academic) examination. In the light of the aforesaid discussions, the writ petition with the bunch of 23 orders matters were allowed. 4 In view of the above, the present writ petition deserves to be succeed and is accordingly allowed. The respondents are directed to evaluate the merit of the petitioner afresh on the basis of marks obtained by him in Senior Secondary (Vocational) alone and accordingly if he finds place in merit, he may be considered and appointed. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be entitled for only notional benefit for the intervening period. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date copy of the judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.32.