[2025:RJ-JP:17694] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18660/2018 Manish Kumar Sharma S/o Ramdatt Sharma, aged about 29 years, R/o 25/125, VPO Kenthary, Tehsil Saipav, District Dholpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Principal Education Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saumil Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 25/04/2025 1. The petitioner in instant writ petition has sought direction to accept his offline form for the post of 'Teacher Grade-III Level-II' pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2018 and, in case, his name finds place in merit and he may be appointed on the aforesaid post. The petitioner has also challenged the condition No.9.6 of the advertisement dated 31.07.2018. 2. Petitioner has submitted that as per the aforesaid advertisement dated 31.07.2018, the candidates were although required to possess graduation degree with degree of Bachelor of Education (hereinafter referred to as, "B.Ed."), yet on the last date permitted for filing the application form i.e., 25.08.2018, he was not having B.Ed. degree and as per the petitioner on that date he [2025:RJ-JP:17694] (2 of 3) [CW-18660/2018] was pursuing the B.Ed. course. Petitioner has relied upon the judgment in the case of Trilok Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.667/2015 by this Court at Principal Seat at Jodhpur to contend that he was not required to possess the degree on the last date prescribed for submitting the application form and in fact, as per the aforesaid judgment of Trilok Ram (supra), he could have produced such degree on the date of consideration. Hence, such condition No.9.6 mentioned in the advertisement is directly under the teeth of aforesaid judgment of Trilok Ram (supra) and the respondent were under an obligation to consider him eligible for appearing in the aforesaid examination. 3. Vide order dated 21.08.2018 passed in the instant writ petition, the petitioner was permitted to participate provisionally in the recruitment process. 4. Respondents have filed reply to the writ petition in order to oppose the prayer made by the petitioner. It has been stated that although in the compliance of interim order, the petitioner was permitted provisionally to participate in the process, yet even after participation he could not secure proper place in merit. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents has also informed that judgment of Trilok Ram (supra) passed by this Court was further challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by way of filing S.L.P. (C) No.309/2017, wherein the similar condition in the advertisement has been upheld by observing that the candidates are required to possess the requisite qualification for eligibility on the last date of submission of application form. [2025:RJ-JP:17694] (3 of 3) [CW-18660/2018] 6. Hence, in view of above discussions, no interference is called for in the instant writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. 7. Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/153