[2025:RJ-JP:51439] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19748/2025 1. Pawan Kumar Swami S/o Duli Chand Swami, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Ward No. 3, Sarkari College Ke Piche, Suratgarh, Ganganagar, Rajasthan-335804. 2. Mularam S/o Girdari Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 1, Akora, Po Deh, District Nagaur, Rajasthan-341022 3. Gurdas S/o Anatram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ward No. 06, Vpo Nukera, 2 Ptp (Nukera), Po Nukera, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan-335063 ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shraddha Mehta for Mr. Punit Singhvi For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 18/12/2025 1. Instant writ petition is preferred with following prayer: “(i) By an appropriate writ, order direction, the actions of the respondents in rejecting the candidature of the petitioners for the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) Special Education pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2018 [2025:RJ-JP:51439] (2 of 5) [CW-19748/2025] may kindly be declared arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and consequently be quashed and set aside. (ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to grant appointment to the petitioners on the post of Teacher Grade-III (Level-II) Special Education in their respective subject and according to their respective merit pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2018 along with all consequential benefits including seniority. (iii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the qualifications possessed by the petitioners i.e., B.Ed. in General Education with One Year Post Graduate Diploma in Special Education be treated as valid qualification for appointment on the post of Special Teachers pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2018 (iv) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to implement the judgment dated 24.09.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 8140/2024; Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. in case of the instant petitioners who are similarly situated candidates and the petitioners' candidature be considered for recruitment on the post of Teacher Grade III (Level-II) Special Education pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2018. (v) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the arbitrary and illegal actions of the respondents of not considering the qualification of the petitioners as valid for recruitment pursuant to advertisement dated 31.07.2018 may kindly be deprecated in strongest terms.” [2025:RJ-JP:51439] (3 of 5) [CW-19748/2025] 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while relying upon judgment in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. Civil Appeal No.8140/2024 submits that the matters pertains to recruitment notification dated 31.07.2018 for the purpose of appointment on post of Teacher Grade III (Level-2) General Education as well as Special Education. She further submits that the controversy has already been decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra) and the instant writ petition be disposed of in light of said judgment. 3. Having considered the material placed on record and also the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the issue in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma (supra) as under: “The short issue arising for consideration is whether the qualification of the appellants, who possess a B.Ed (General Education) along with a post-graduate professional diploma in Special Education, is equivalent to the prescribed qualification, i.e. graduation and B.Ed. (Special Education).” 4. Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered the issue and observed as under: “11. The answer to this question is simple and straightforward for the following reasons:- a. It is an admitted fact that the advertisement which is issued is intended for the recruitment of Special Education Teachers. Recruitment of teachers intended for special education is governed by the RCI Act, a special statute, the [2025:RJ-JP:51439] (4 of 5) [CW-19748/2025] regulator of which is the Rehabilitation Council of India, which has a statutory status. b. The council has already issued an order dated 20.04.2009 indicating that B.Ed. (General Education) coupled with Diploma (special education) shall be treated as an equivalent degree to B.Ed. (Special Education) i.e., the prescribed qualification in the impugned notification. c. It is also clear that the NCTE, which is the statutory body with respect to school education, has recognised the special role performed by the RCI as regards the regulatory measures needed to be taken for the requirement of special educators. In this very context, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between NCTE and RCI was entered into on 08.04.2015. d. In Civil Appeal Nos. 8144-8145/2024, 8141- 8143/2024 and 8497-8499/2024, we are informed that there is also a letter dated written by NCTE stating that qualifications relating to the appointment of Special Educators are as prescribed by RCI vide its circular dated 11.04.2017. 12. From the MoU, it becomes clear that NCTE has, in fact, collaborated with RCI and has entered into an agreement to ensure that, insofar as general education is concerned, the prescription of NCTE should be followed and insofar as schools for special education are concerned, the prescription of RCI should be followed. The decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Pritam Kumar Tak (supra) and Rajni (supra) are on the same line. 13. Mr. Rishi Malhotra, learned senior counsel, has also brought to our notice the decision of this [2025:RJ-JP:51439] (5 of 5) [CW-19748/2025] Court in Rajnish Kumar Pandey v. Union of India4 which emphasises the role of RCI in the domain of special education. 14. In view of the above, we are of the opinion thatthere is no difficulty for the State Government in considering the case of the appellants who possess a B.Ed. (General Education) along with a one-year Post Graduate Professional Diploma in Special Education (PG PD-SE) as equivalent to the prescribed qualification in the advertisement. 15. We are aware of the fact that the advertisement was issued way back on 31st July, 2018, and the process of recruitment would have been over by now. However, if there are any vacancies left, we direct the respondents to consider the case of the appellants and pass necessary orders within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 5. Having considered aforesaid, the instant writ petition is disposed of in terms of order dated 24.09.2025 in case of Manoj Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra) and respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners in light of directions passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Needless to say that we have not expressed out opinion on merits of the case. 6. Accordingly, writ petition along with misc. application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /456