[2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 214/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10086/2023 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. ----Appellants Versus 1. Hemlata Pooniya D/o Ramji Lal Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o VPO Lasadiya, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Hansa Jat D/o Rameshwar Jat, Aged About 24 Years, R/o VPO Mendwas, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Arman Kumar S/o Radheshyam, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Chaharan Wali Dhani (30 PSA), VPO Bishanpura, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. 4. Rama Kant Yogi S/o Suraj Mal Yogi, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 54, Bairwa Mohalla, Chaker, District Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan. 5. Shubham Sharma S/o Bhagwan Sahay Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o VPO Roopwas, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 6. National Council For Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, Wing 2, 1 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 Through Secretary 7. Rehabilitation Council Of India, B-22, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi-110016 Through Secretary. 8. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 9. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Chairman, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 10. Sunita Verma D/o Mangtu Ram Verma, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Chak 22 Mod, Lakhasar, Palibangan, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (2 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 450/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10086/2023 1. Manish Gurjar S/o Badri Prasad Gurjar, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Todalari Baya Gathwadi, Tehsil Jamvaramgarh, Todalari, District Jaipur, Rajasthan- 303120. 2. Mahipal Dukiya S/o Ramswaroop Dukiya, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Dukiya Market, Gotan, Tehsil Merta City, Gothan, PO Gotan, District Nagaur, Rajasthan- 342902. 3. Dinesh Kumar Nagar S/o Jagdish Nagar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Khera, Post Harigarh, Tehsil Khanpur, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan- 326001. ----Appellants Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. National Council For Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, Wing 2, 1 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 Through Secretary. 4. Rehabilitation Council Of India, B-22, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi- 110016 Through Secretary. 5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 6. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Chairman, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 7. Hemlata Pooniya D/o Ramji Lal Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o VPO Lasadiya, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 8. Hansa Jat D/o Rameshwar Jat, Aged About 24 Years, R/o VPO Mendwas, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 9. Arman Kumar S/o Radheshyam, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Chaharan Wali Dhani (30 PSA), VPO Bishanpura, [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (3 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. 10. Rama Kant Yogi S/o Suraj Mal Yogi, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 54, Bairwa Mohalla, Chaker, District Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan. 11. Shubham Sharma S/o Bhagwan Sahay Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o VPO Roopwas, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 457/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.828/2023 1. Manish Gurjar S/o Badri Prasad Gurjar, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Todalari Baya Gathwadi, Tehsil Jamvaramgarh, Todalari, District Jaipur, Rajasthan- 303120. 2. Mahipal Dukiya S/o Ramswaroop Dukiya, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Dukiya Market, Gotan, Tehsil Merta City, Gothan, PO Gotan, District Nagaur, Rajasthan- 342902. 3. Dinesh Kumar Nagar S/o Jagdish Nagar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Khera, Post Harigarh, Tehsil Khanpur, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan- 326001. ----Appellants Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. National Council For Teacher Education, Hans Bhawan, Wing 2, 1 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 Through Secretary. 4. Rehabilitation Council Of India, B-22, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi- 110016 Through Secretary. 5. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Secretary, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 6. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Its Chairman, Agriculture Management Institute Building, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan. [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (4 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] 7. Naresh Jat S/o Shri Ram Lal Jat, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Chougai, Post Chougai, Tehsil Peeplu, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 8. Vishal Tetarwal S/o Shri Rajesh Tetarwal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Chougai, Post Chougai, Tehsil Peeplu, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 9. Hanuman Prasad Jat S/o Shri Badri Lal Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Chougai, Post Chougai, These Peeplu, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 10. Lata Yadav D/o Shri Balwant Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o VPO Pratapsinghpura, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar, Rajasthan. 11. Ashvini Yadav D/o Shri Vijayveer Yadav, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Rajwana, Post Talwana, Raiwana, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar, Rajasthan. 12. Kapil Kumar Sharma S/o Ram Avtar Sharma, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Plot No. 4, Ganesh Vihar, Sanskar College Road, Near Jagdamba Petrol Pump, Peeplu, Tehsil Peeplu, District Tonk- 304801, Rajasthan. 13. Priya Maurya D/o Radheshyam Maurya, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village And Post Kaloowas, District Dausa- 303505, Rajasthan. 14. Vipin S/o Sumer Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village And Post Entera, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar, Rajasthan- 301021, Rajasthan. 15. Shailendra Saini S/o Laxman Ram Saini, Aged About 33 Years, R/o VPO Akhaigarh, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 16. Kuldeep Singh S/o Kamlesh Kumar, Aged About 26 Years, R/o B-86, Bharat Vihar, Jamdoli, Agra Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 17. Poonam Kumari D/o Veer Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o VPO Baroliran, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 18. Krishan Murari Yadav S/o Prahlad Singh Yadav, Aged About 27 Years, R/o A-587, Shreeram Colony, Kati Ghati, Rajgarh Road, Alwar, Rajasthan. 19. Manjula Meena D/o Gokul Chand Meena, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 7, Village Jaisinghpura, Dera [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (5 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] Bamanwas, Alwar, Rajasthan. 20. Ram Pal S/o Ramswrup, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Rajputo Ka Mohalla, Village Bhagwansar, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 21. Neelam D/o Krishan Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Jivandesar, Tehsil Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. 22. Pankaj Yadav S/o Lalman Yadav, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Bhojrajka, Post Kalgaon, Tehsil Kotakasim, District Alwar, Rajasthan. 23. Ram Charan Mahendra S/o Om Prakash, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Uday Nagar, Sadri, Lohawat, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 24. Bharat Inaniya S/o Chena Ram Inaniya, Aged About 21 Years, R/o VPO Bayad, Post Gagarana, Tehsil Merta City, District Nagaur, Rajasthan. 25. Meharampuri S/o Nemapuri, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Nemapuri, Jhalalar, Post Jayal, District Nagaur, Rajasthan. 26. Ajay Pal Singh S/o Bhim Raj, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village 23 NTR, Post Parlika, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 27. Sandeep S/o Mainpal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Nyangal, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 28. Sita Ram S/o Hari Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village 23 NTR, Post Parlika, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 29. Manohar Singh S/o Jay Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village 23 NTR, Post Parlika, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. 30. Mukesh Khokhar S/o Mangharam, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Khokhro Ki Dhani, Gotan, Tehsil Merta City, District Nagaur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, AG assisted by Ms. Dhriti Laddha, Mr. Tanay Goyal & Ms. Harshita Thakral Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora with [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (6 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] Mr. Harender Neel, Mr. Kuldeep Singh Rathore, Mr. Amogh Gupta & Mr. Amulya Jemini For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat Mr. Abhishek Mewara, Mr. Ms. Kritika Singh Mr. Raghu Nandan Sharma with Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava and Mr. Ayush Bishnoi Mr. Himanshu Jain with Ms. Apoorva Agarwal Mr. Ajay S. Rathore with Mr. Yashovardhan Agarwal for Mr. Punit Singhvi HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Judgment 28/11/2025 1. The issue raised in the present appeals are no more res integra in view of the authoritative pronouncement of Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 8140/2024: Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. along with other connected civil appeals No. 8144-8145/2024, 8141-8143/2024, 7404-7406/2024 & 8497-8499/2024. 2. We notice that the learned Single Judge while deciding the petitions mentioned about the case being pending before the Supreme Court. The challenge to the judgment passed on 12.08.2024, the State would now, therefore, be governed by the judgment passed by the Supreme Court (supra). 3. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. R.N. Mathur, submits that while the Supreme Court was considering the cases relating to persons who possessed B.Ed General and Diploma in General Education for the purpose of appointment so far as the Rehabilitation Council of [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (7 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] India (hereinafter referred as "RCI") is concerned, it simply allows candidates with Graduate and Diploma in Special Education to be sufficient qualification for appointment of Teachers Level-II in order to teach students up to 8th Class. He refers to a letter issued by the RCI to the State Government dated 26.07.2024 for that purpose and submits that even those candidates who have done simply graduation and thereafter have done Diploma in Special Education ought to be also treated as having requisite qualification for appointment as Teachers Level-II in Special Education. 4. We have considered the submissions. 5. It would apposite to quote the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in extensive from para 10 onward. "10. 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) 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 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 [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (8 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] 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 Court in Rajnish Kumar Pandey v. Union of India which emphasises the role of RCI in the domain of special education. 14. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that there 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 31 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. 16. The appeals are accordingly disposed of. 17. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand closed." 6. The conclusion of the Supreme Court thus, as per our understanding is that so far as the qualification for appointment of Special Educators are concerned, it would be the qualifications laid down by the RCI, which would be relevant and National Council for Teachers Education (for short 'NCTE') would accept the qualifications as they are laid down by the RCI. Secondly, the Apex Court has also reached to the conclusion that those who possessed qualification of B.Ed (General Education) along with one [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (9 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] year Post Graduate Professional Diploma in Special Education would also be eligible for consideration for appointment. 7 We notice that apart from above, having given a finding that RCI would be the authority to lay down the qualifications and the NCTE has accepted it, any candidate who possesses graduate qualification and has done B.Ed in General Education plus has also done in Special Education whether for one year or two years would be having sufficient qualification for appointment as Level-II. 8. We are, however, not in agreement with the submissions raised by the learned Senior Counsel that even a graduate who has not done B.Ed in General Education, but has done Diploma in Special Education would be eligible for appointment as Level-II. The correct interpretation of the letter issued by the RCI to the State Government dated 26.07.2024 has to be read in consonance with the earlier letter dated 10.06.2022 issued by the RCI as quoted in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge wherein, it has been clearly specified that for the middle stage Class 6 to 8 teachers, the qualifications would be as under: Levels Qualifications Recruitment Process Minimu m No. of Spl. Ed. Teacher (s) Recommende d PTR Remark Foundation al Stage (Pre-school Class 1 & 2). Primary Level 1. D.Ed. In Special Education from a RCI approved Institute and possess a valid RCI CRR number or Through CTET/TET/NT A Score+ Demonstratio n of Class room teaching + Interview or as per the recruitment process and apted from 10:1 (Pupils with disabilities enrolled and special teacher) Availabilit y of service of special education teacher should be mandator y even if the school has one student with disability. Preparation Stage (Class 3 to 5) D.El.Ed. With a recognized qualification (Certificate/Diploma *) from a RCI approved institution equivalent to D.Ed. In Special Education One (***) [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (10 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] and possess a valid CRR number 2. Six-month training of teaching in cross disability area in inclusive education (**) time to time Middle Stage (Class 6 to 8) Upper Primary +Secondar y + Higher Secondary 1. B.Ed. in Special Education from a RCI Approved Institute and possess a valid RCI and CRR number or B.Ed. with a recognized qualification (Certificate/Diploma *) from a RCI approved institution equivalent to B.Ed. in Special Education and possess a valid RCI CRR number 2. Six-month training of teaching in cross disability area in inclusive education (**) 15:1 (Pupils with disabilities enrolled and special education teacher). Secondary Stage Class 9 to 12) 9. Thus, what is necessary is that a person must possess a B.Ed qualification whether General or Special Education, if he posses B.Ed in Special Education, he need not further have any other requirement, however, he may be B.Ed in General plus he has recognized qualification namely Diploma or Certificate Course in Special Education for the purpose. The letter also reiterates the same, it only it reiterates that the candidate who possesses a Diploma in Education (Special Education B.Ed) would be also eligible for consideration for appointment. It does not in any manner say that the other qualifications would not be looked into. Thus, apart from D.Ed Special Education, the State would also examined whether the candidate possess B.Ed in General or not apart from being graduate. [2025:RJ-JP:48531-DB] (11 of 11) [SAW-214/2025] 10. We therefore, conclude that the Sate Government shall now consider all the candidates who have applied for the post who possess B.Ed in General along with Diploma in Special Education as a sufficient qualification for appointment, all such candidates would be considered according to their merit, and be given appointment as soon as possible, preferably, the exercise may be done within a period of two months henceforth. 11. In accordance with the litigation policy, we would advise the State Government to apply this judgment to all the candidates who have applied in stead of forcing them to come for further litigation before this Court, therefore, this judgment shall be applied to all the candidates. 12. In view of the aforesaid, the appeals stand disposed of accordingly. 13. All pending applications also stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Gaurav/Riya/34-36