M.N.BHANDARI, J. - (1.) SINCE this bunch of writ petitions are based on same facts and grounds, thus have been heard and decided by this common judgment.
(2.) THE respondent-Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short the RPSC) issued an advertisement calling for applications for the post of Teacher Grade-II in Sanskrit Education Department. So far as the present matter is concerned, it pertains to post of Teacher Grade-II in Sanskrit Subject. Column 6 of the advertisement provides qualification of the post and so far as the post of Teacher Grade-II in Sanskrit Subject is concerned, it is provided that one should have the qualification of Shastri or equivalent Traditional Sanskrit Examination with Sanskrit Medium from an University established by the law and Shiksha Shastri/Decree in Education recognized by the Government. THE petitioners are having the qualification of B.A. in Sanskrit and few petitioners are having M.A. in Sanskrit or qualification of Acharya with B.Ed. or Shiksha Shastri Degree. The petitioners were called for the examination and accordingly they appeared for the written test. The respondents thereafter declared the result wherein petitioners secured more marks than the last candidate selected in their category. The petitioners were, however, disqualified for want of required qualification. On inquiry, it was found that candidates not having the qualification of Shastri or equivalent Traditional Sanskrit Examination with Sanskrit Medium were disqualified for the appointment. Even the candidates for the post of Sanskrit Teacher Grade-Ill, were also disqualified for want of qualification of Varistha Upadhyaya. On further inquiry, petitioners could reveal that the candidates having qualification of graduation or postgraduate in Sanskrit subject were disqualified by not treating aforesaid to be equivalent to Traditional Sanskrit Examination with Sanskrit Medium.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that B.A. with Sanskrit subject has always been treated equivalent to the qualification of Shastri. This can be seen from the website of the Sanskrit Department itself. Even the University has treated qualification of B.A. with Sanskrit equivalent to qualification of Shastri and thereby candidates are allowed for higher studies. The qualification was amended by the respondents vide notification dated 10.6.2008. However, same is in ignorance of the Regulations of the National Council for Teachers Education (for short 'the NCTE') wherein one is held qualified for B.Ed. Course, if possesses the qualification of B.A. in Sanskrit subject and accordingly, University is also treating a graduate in Sanskrit subject eligible for B.Ed. Course by treating it to be equivalent to Shastri. Even the Board of Secondary Education has also given equivalence to various courses like Praveshika and Varistha Upadhyaya and is treated equivalent to 12th Class examination for higher education. Thus, contrary to the Regulations of the NCTE, University and Board of Secondary Education, the respondents have provided the qualification by amending the Rule through the notification dated 10.6.2008. It is stated that Rule so amended has not been challenged in any of the writ petitions, but then interpretation of the Rule has to be made after taking into consideration the Regulations of the NCTE, University and Board of Secondary Education. In fact, M.A. in Sanskrit is higher qualification than the qualification of Shastri and otherwise B.A. in Sanskrit is to be treated as equivalent traditional Sanskrit examination with Sanskrit medium. However, after giving erroneous interpretation, the respondents have deprived the petitioners from their right of appointment to the post of Teacher Grade-II in Sanskrit subject. LEARNED counsel for petitioner have referred the judgment of this Court in the case of Ramnarain Verma vs. State of Rajasthan and 2 Ors. reported in 1986 RLR Page 525 wherein question of equivalence of the qualification of Shiksha Shastri came up for consideration and therein it was held to be a Bachelor's degree in Education is equivalent. Other than the aforesaid judgment, no other judgment has been cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners.;