HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10163/2024 Rajkumari Bagadi D/o Shri Mohan Lal Bagadi, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Radoli, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Department of Medical and Health, Rajasthan, Ajmer. 3. Chief Medical Officer, Dholpur. 4. Rajasthan Nursing Council, B-29, Sardar Patel Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur Through its Registrar. 5. Government Anm Training Center Dholpur, through its Nursing Superintendent. 6. Board Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan Ajmer through Its Registrar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Saini Mr. Prashant Saini Mr. M.S.Raghav Mr. Vishwas Saini JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/04/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “a) By an appropriate writ, order and direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to continue the study of the (2 of 4) [CW-10163/2024] petitioner of ANM Course Session 2023-25; conduct Special Examination of ANM 1st Year Examination 2024 and allow the petitioner to continue her course. b) By an appropriate writ order the direction the respondent Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan Ajmer may kindly be directed to make the position clear pertaining to equivalence of Council of Open School Education Rajasthan in the Year 2011 and 2013 when the petitioner had passed Secondary and Senior Secondary Examination. c). Any other relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the Petitioner.” 2. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction against the respondents to allow her to continue his studies in ANM Course for the Sessions 2023-2025 and conduct Special Examination for the 1st year Examination, 2024. A prayer has also been made for issuing a direction to the respondents to treat the Class 10th certificate of the petitioner issued by the Council of Open School Education, Rajasthan as equivalent to the Certificate of Board of Secondary Education (herein-after referred to as ‘the Board’). 3. Counsel for the respondents has apprised this Court that the certificate of Secondary School issued by the Open School Education have not been treated as equivalent to the certificate of Secondary School Examination issued by the Board. Counsel submits that this Court cannot give equivalence to the aforesaid certificates under its writ jurisdiction contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Counsel submits that this view has been taken by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Zahoor Ahmad Rather and Ors. v. Imtiyaz Ahmad and Ors. reported (3 of 4) [CW-10163/2024] in (2019)2 SCC 404. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to get the relief as sought in the instant petition and the petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no fault of the petitioner in getting admission in the college on the basis of the educational documents possessed by the petitioner. Counsel submits that even the requisite fees has been deposited, so atleast a direction be issued to the college to refund the fees taken from the petitioner. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the respondents and in view of the fact that the Board of Secondary Education has not granted recognition to the Secondary School Certificate issued by the Open School Education unless and until equivalence or recognition is granted by the Board of Secondary Education, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief from this Court. Thus, this Court refrains from issuing any direction to the Board to treat the certificate possessed by the petitioner from the Council of Open School Education as equivalent to the Secondary School examination certificate issued by the Board. As the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Zahoor Ahmad Rather (Supra) has held that a judicial review can neither expand the ambit of the prescribed qualifications nor decide the equivalence of the prescribed qualifications with any other given qualification, therefore the equivalence of a qualification is not a matter which can be determined in exercise of the power of judicial review. (4 of 4) [CW-10163/2024] Whether a particular qualification should or should not be regarded as equivalent is a matter for the state, as the recruiting authority, to determine, hence this Court finds no valid reason to take a different view and in view of the submission made by counsel for the respondents, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed. 8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to move application before the concerned college for refund of fees. 9. The concerned college is directed to refund the fees of the petitioner for granting admission to her on the basis of the documents/educational qualification possessed by her even when the petitioner was not liable to get admission in the collage. The college is directed to refund the fees along with interest @ 6% to the petitioner forthwith without any further delay, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/3