2018 (9) TMI 1932 - HC - Indian Laws

Validity of order on account of petitioner lacking in requisite qualification pertaining to computer education - the petitioner submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment of this Court in HEERA LAL JAT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN, DEPUTY SECRETARY, ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (GROUP-3) DEPARTMENT, ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 2018 (8) TMI 1921 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT where it was held that The respondents are directed to consider candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of LDC in pursuance of advertisement of the year 2013 while treating him to be having a valid qualification of Computer Application obtained in Graduation and provide him appointment on the post of LDC if he is otherwise eligible and meritorious within a period of 60 days from today. The writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed with the similar direction as given in the case of Heera Lal Jat with the additional stipulation that the above relief would be applicable only if the vacancies are available.

Summary

Issues:
Validity of order based on petitioner's lack of computer education qualification.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order citing lack of required computer education qualification. The petitioner's counsel argued that a previous judgment in Heera Lal Jat v. State of Raj. & Ors. had set a precedent regarding computer qualifications. The court in the previous case had ruled that a person with a Computer Application qualification in graduation should be considered qualified for computer-related positions. The court noted that the respondents themselves had included a degree in Computer Science in their notification, indicating flexibility in the subject's requirement. The court allowed the present writ petition, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment as an LDC, given his Computer Application qualification, within 60 days if vacancies were available.

The respondent's counsel did not contest that the issue raised in the current petition was covered by the judgment in Heera Lal Jat's case. The court, therefore, allowed the petitioner's writ petition with a similar direction as in the Heera Lal Jat case, emphasizing that the relief granted would be subject to the availability of vacancies. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering qualifications broadly and ensuring fair opportunities for candidates with relevant educational backgrounds, as established in previous legal precedents.