1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7129/2005 (Sohan Singh Vs. State of Raj. Ors.) Date of order : 7.7.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. S.L. Sankhala, for the petitioner. Mr. Shyam Ladrecha, Dy. Govt. Counsel. The claim of the petitioner is that he applied for appointment on the post of Shiksha Sahayogi in the year 2001 being handicapped candidate. The case of the petitioner was forwarded with special recommendation letter to the concerned authority for appointment as Shiksha Sahayogi in special quota but the respondents did not give any proper attention. The petitioner has placed on record Annexure-5 to show that he was selected for the post of Shiksha Sahayogi in the column of qualification it is mentioned that the petitioner is possessing Senior Secondary qualification. The case of the petitioner is that relaxation was granted by the Government for providing appointment to seven persons and they were providing appointment in pursuance of the relaxation so granted 2 on the post of Shiksha Sahayogi, therefore, the respondents have committed discrimination which is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Before approaching this Court, a representation was filed by the petitioner before the respondents for granting same relief of relaxation to provide him appointment on the post of Shiksha Sahayogi but said benefit of relaxation was not provided to the petitioner and the same was extended vide Annexure-6 to as many as seven persons and they are still working on the post of Shiksha Sahayogi, therefore, the petitioner is seeking interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the respondents for granting the same relaxation to the petitioner which is granted to similarly situated persons and further it is prayed that the respondents may be directed to provide appointment to the petitioner on the post of SS. Per contra, it is contended by learned Dy. Govt. Counsel that the petitioner was not possessing the requisite qualification, which is Senior Secondary with BSTC, therefore, he was not provided appointment and the petitioner cannot claim relaxation as a matter of right, therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed. I have considered the rival submission and 3 perused the entire record of the case. In this case, the relaxation was granted by the State Government vide Annexure-6 for acquiring BSTC or B.Ed for appointment on the post of SS and this communication was issued by the Dy. Director, Elementary Education, Govt. of Rajasthan on 4.7.2001, if such relaxation is granted to similarly situated persons then how the same is denied to the petitioner, who is handicapped persons and who is claiming appointment at par with those seven persons who have been granted relaxation. In my opinion, the petitioner is also entitled for same relaxation which is granted to seven persons. In this view of the matter, the respondents are directed to grant same benefit of relaxation in qualification of BSTC and treat the petitioner for providing appointment and after considering his case while granting relaxation in BSTC. The petitioner may be given appointment from the date when similarly situated persons were provided appointment within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with no order as to costs. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun