@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
N.K. Jain-I, J.@mdashHeard learned counsel for the petitioners. The matter relates to advertisement for appointment on the post of Technical Helper issued by the respondents. The dispute in the case is about holding of qualification as on 5th October, 2012 i.e. last date for submitting the application form.
2. The grievance of petitioners is that petitioners have already appeared in two years diploma course and result is awaited and since the Rule is silent, therefore, this condition for holding the educational qualification as on 5th October, 2012 should be relaxed.
3. Similar issue has already been examined in detail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Rajendra Kumar Phagodiya & Ors. v. JVVNL & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14942/2011 decided on 2nd November, 2011 and in Vijendra Kumar & Ors. v. JVVNL & Anr. decided on 1st February, 2012, wherein submissions of petitioners were considered and it was held that a candidate is required to possess educational qualification on or before the last date of submission of application, therefore, writ petitions were dismissed.
4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and examined the order of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Rajendra Kumar''s ease (supra) as well as Vijendra Kumar''s case (supra). The order dated 1st February, 2012 passed by coordinate Bench in Vijendra Kumar''s case is reproduced, as under:--
The matter has come up on an application for vacation of stay order dated 14.9.2011, however, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the matter is heard finally.
Learned counsel submits that petitioners were not allowed for selection to the post of Technical Assistant only on the ground that result of course required for educational qualification was not declared. In the aforesaid background, this Court granted interim relief and petitioners have appeared in the selection. Petitioners have now qualified the educational course required for the post, accordingly the respondents may be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners and, if any of the petitioners possess merit position, then be given appointment.
Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand submits that the issue raised herein has already been decided by this Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar Phagodiya & Ors. v. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Ors. in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14942/2011 decided on 2nd November, 2011. Therein, it was held that educational qualification is required to be possessed on or before the last date of submission of application form and as the petitioners were not possessing required qualification as admitted by them, they were not held eligible for appointment and selection as per the advertisement.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided by this Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar Phagodiya & Ors. (supra). Therein, it was found at Item No. 2 of the advertisement, the qualification was required on or before the last date of submission of application. The rules are silent to provide cut off date for required qualification. In the aforesaid background, one was required to possess qualification on or before the last date of submission of application. In the aforesaid background, petitioner cannot be held eligible for the selection to the post of Technical Assistant.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed and is ordered to be covered by the judgment in the case of Rajendra Kumar Phagodiya & Ors. (supra).
This disposes of the stay application also.
The controversy involved in the present case is fully covered by the aforesaid decisions, therefore, for the same reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. The stay application is also dismissed.
