Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. These two petitioners passed the recruitment test upto the interview for appointment of Primary Teachers under the respondent -DVC under the Advertisement at Annexure -1, which prescribes the following qualifications and experience: - -
(2.) The petitioners have not been included in the panel of selected candidates thereafter, which is their grievance raised in the present writ petition. The evident reasons for holding the petitioners ineligible as stated in the counter affidavit of the respondent -Corporation is that both the petitioners have passed the Siksha Visharad examination conducted by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad claiming to be equivalent to B.Ed., though they have not been able to show even at the time of interview any documents showing declaration of the equivalence of the said qualification to that of the required B.Ed, qualification prescribed under the advertisement.
(3.) Counsel for the respondents have submitted that Siksha Visharad qualification is not even recognized by the State of Jharkhand as has also been held by the learned Division Bench of this Court in a batch of cases being LPA No. 235 of 2004 (Dilip Kumar Gupta and Others v/s. State of Jharkhand) along with analogous cases in the matter arising out of a similar recruitment test conducted by JPSE for appointment to the post of primary teachers. Paragraph 42 of the said judgment, which contains the discussion on the qualifications of Siksha Visharad obtained from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad is relied upon. It is also submitted that the employer has a right to make a choice and it is within the domain of the employer to declare equivalence of any qualification prescribed for such recruitment, such as B.Ed, in the instant case. Therefore, petitioners have though been called for interview but did not have a legal right to be included in the panel for such employment.;