(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)
1. The appellant State has sought to challenge common order dated 13.10.2011 of learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the petitions of the selected teachers were allowed. The only controversy and contention of the appellants is that while issuing advertisement for recruitment of 'Vidhya Sahayaks' one of the prescribed qualification was graduation in Science (B.Sc.). However, when the original petitioners came to be selected on the basis of marks and rating on merits, it was found that they were B.Sc. in Home Science or Forestry. Therefore, it was vehemently argued by learned AGP appearing for the appellants that 'Vidhya Sahayaks' were being recruited to meet the requirements of teaching students in Standards 6 to 8 in consonance with and for enforcement of the fundamental right to education. He submitted that such Science graduates as the respondents could not have studied maths or science during graduation, and hence, could not be employed to teach maths and science to the students of Standards 6 to 8.
2. As recorded in the impugned judgment, neither the Government Resolution dated 27.4.2011 nor the requirement prescribed in the advertisement precluded or deprived the candidates like the original petitioners, who had obtained their degree in Science in Forestry or Home Science from recognized University. In addition to that, the original petitioners had obtained qualifications of PTC, B.Ed. and TET examinations. Therefore, the respondents herein could not be denied appointment. Learned AGP could not point out any precedent or provision of law which would permit change in the prescribed qualification after the advertisement and the selection process being undertaken.
3. Therefore, as this Court is in agreement with the reasoning adopted by learned Single Judge, the appeals are not required to be entertained and accordingly dismissed in limine along with Civil Applications.
(D.H.Waghela, J.) (Mohinder Pal, J.) *malek Top