Supreme Court upholds validity of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008
Justices Surya Kant & KV Viswanathan [08-07-2024]

Read Order: MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS [SC - CA NO. 7906 OF 2010]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, July 9, 2024: The Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008, which govern the recruitment and service conditions for the post of 'Prabodhak' (teacher) in Rajasthan. The Top Court dismissed a batch of 47 appeals filed by candidates challenging various provisions of the Rules.

A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan held that “we find no glaring error or perversity in the criterion adopted on the peculiar facts of the present case. No mala fide could also be attributed to the State and the Selection Committee”.

The Rajasthan government had launched educational projects like Shiksha Karmi Project in 1987 to reach out to children in remote rural areas where formal primary schools were non-existent or dysfunctional. Local youth with basic educational qualifications were identified and trained to teach in these project schools. They were paid an honorarium.

In 2008, the government amended the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act to create a regular cadre of Prabodhaks, and framed the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules to govern their recruitment.

The key provisions that were challenged before the apex court include Rule 13(v) that provides age relaxation to persons who served under the educational projects, if they were within the age limit at the time of initial engagement in the project. This was challenged as discriminatory. Guidelines issued before the recruitment advertisement awarded bonus marks to applicants with experience in government educational projects. This was challenged as ultra vires the Rules and discriminatory.

The Apex Court held that Rule 13(v) providing age relaxation to project employees is not arbitrary or discriminatory. It noted the historical background and rationale of the Prabodhak cadre creation to give benefit of project employees' experience.

The Bench held that project employees form a separate class and there is a valid classification with intelligible differentia having a rational nexus to the object of the Rules. On bonus marks, the Top Court upheld the validity of the pre-advertisement guidelines awarding higher marks for project experience, finding it justified given the nature of work of Prabodhaks and the objective of the Rules.

The Apex Court noted that the Rules intrinsically recognize project experience to be on a higher pedestal. The guidelines only supplement the Rules and do not supplant them, it observed.

The Supreme Court thus dismissed the appeals after finding no merit in them.