1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 149/2007 Meera Vyas Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. Date of Order : 18/05/2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi for the petitioner. Mr. B.L.Tiwari, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the respondents. BY THE COURT:- By the instant writ petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to award additional five marks for her teaching experience and consider her case for appointment on the post of Senior Teacher (Maths) (Girls) in pursuance of advertisement dated 3.11.2003 Annex.7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the petitioner applied for the post of Senior Teacher (Maths) (Girls) in pursuance of the advertisement Annex.7 dated 3.11.2003 issued by the respondent No.2. The 2 advertisement Annex.7 provides certain marks for the teaching experience. In Condition No.11 of the said advertisement, it has been provided that for the teacher Gr.II, those teachers who have been working as teacher in secondary school, primary school, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Educational Institutions, Sanskrit Department and the schools to which the State Government has granted grant-in-aid, will be eligible for the additional marks for teaching experience. The petitioner came with a case that she has neither been appointed as teacher with the respondent State or in any of the school run by the State Govt. nor in the Govt. aided school, but she has been serving as teacher with Navodaya Vidhyalaya under the scheme of the Central Government and therefore, the petitioner be also equated with that of those teachers who have been teaching in the schools run by the State Govt. as also the schools whi have been provided the grant-in-aid by the respondent State. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents stating therein that it is a policy matter and the decision taken by the respondent State is in conformity with the educational policy of the State and the marks for teaching experience have been provided to the teachers who have been teaching in the schools run by the State Govt. as well as the educational institutions which have been provided with grant-in- aid by the State. The circular dated 22.3.2001 Annex.R/1 in clear 3 terms provides that for appointment to the post of Teacher Gr.II, experience shall be given weightage only in respect of teaching in the schools run by the Education Department, Rural Development Department and Panchayati Raj Department and the Teachers who are working on the aided posts in the aided institutions and therefore, the respondents were justified in not granting any marks for the experience to the petitioner as the petitioner was not having teaching experience in the schools run by the Education Department, Rural Development Department and Panchayati Raj Department as also in the schools which have been provided the grant-in-iad by the State. Navodaya Vidhyalaya is not run by the State Govt. nor any grant-in-aid is provided to it. Counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision of this Court in Rekha Kumari Rawat and Ors. Vs. State and Ors. 2006 (8) RDD 4467 (Raj.) wherein this Court held as under :- "In the structure of education system prevailing in State of Rajasthan there are various kind of schools such as primary schools, upper primary schools and senior secondary schools beside certain other autonomous schools. The recruitment for the teachers and other teaching and non teaching staff in the schools is made under the Rules of 1970 or under the Rules of 1971. The Senior Teachers appointed under the Rules of 1971 are having an avenue for promotion to the posts prescribed under the rules of 1970, as such the Rules of 1970 are not strange for interpreting a term used but not defined under the Rules of 1971. The terms "Schools" is not defined under the Rules of 1970, therefore, definition of it prescribed under the Rules of 1971 is certainly useful for determining the 4 question as to whether senior secondary schools are inclusive to term "schools" used in Column 4 of the Entry No.8 of Section-F of the Schedule appended to the Rules of 1971. According to the definition of term "Schools" prescribed under Rule 2 (a) of the Rules of 1970 a higher secondary school is also part of school. In view of it under the Rules of 1970 all type of schools those are part of education system in State of Rajasthan comes within the purview of the term "Schools". If the schools above the secondary level is considered as a "school" under the Rules of 1971, then there is no reason for not brininging the same within the purview of term "schools" under the Rules of 1971, specially in the circumstances that a senior teacher is entitled to teach in senior secondary school also. Learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has relied on a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. (Sushri) Rajni Bala Agarwal Vs. Lalit Narain Mithila University, Darbhanga (Bihar) and Others, AIR 1999 SC 2118 and a Division Bench decision of this Court in Emarata Ram Pooniya and 8 Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan 2005 (2) WLC (Raj.) 358. In Dr. (Sushri) Rajni Bala Agarwal Vs. Lalit Narain Mithila University, Darbhanga (Bihar) and Others (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under :- "Where the qualifications, for appointment of Principal of degree college inter alia, require not less than twelve years' teaching experience at least as a Lecturer in the degree college/ university department and looking to the definition of "college" in the said Act, teaching experience has to be in an affiliated college, the affiliated college must also be a degree college. Under S.2 (s) a "lecturer" is defined to mean a teacher of a college or the University possessing such qualifications as may be prescribed by the statutes. Therefore, the experience of teaching as a lecturer 5 must be as a lecturer in an affiliated degree college which also, in turn, implies possession of qualifications required under the statutes of a lecturer in a degree college. Hon'ble Supreme Court further observed as under:- "Where appointment of appellant was as lecturer in private college which was not affiliated to University and appellant did not produce any material to show that said college was degree college from date she was appointed, the experience of teaching as a lecturer in private college cannot be considered as qualifying experience prescrbied under statutes read with the Act for appointment to post of Principal of degree college. Fact that by the time writ petition was decided she acquired requisite experience, irrelevant. In Emarata Ram Pooniya and 8 Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan, this Court while considering the similar controversy in respect of the appointment to the post of Teacher Gr.II giving bonus marks for experience in Govt. institutions but not for the experience in private recognised institutions held that it is a purely policy matter and further held that the challenge has been made at the stage when the selection have already been made and therefore, the contention with regard to consideration of the teaching experience other than by the Govt. Educational Institutions or Govt. aided institutions was not accepted. In the instant case, the State Govt. has specifically provided and given weightage to the teaching experience in respect of the teachers in the schools run by the Education Department of the State, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department as also the educational institutions which have been 6 provided grant-in-aid by the State. In my view, it is purely a policy matter. The teaching experience gained by the petitioner in the school other than provided in the circular Annex-7 cannot be equated with that of the State. In this view of the matter, no case for interference is made out. The writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R.PANWAR),J. rp