The Supreme Court affirmed the age relaxation granted to Shiksha Karmis and other candidates employed in government educational projects for direct recruitment to the position of Prabodhak (teacher) under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008.

A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan observed that the implementation of educational projects aimed to tackle the issue of absentee teachers in remote areas. The bench highlighted the crucial role played by para teachers in enhancing elementary education and motivating children to attend school.

The court held that classifying these teachers as a separate group for age relaxation under Rule 13(v) is justified, and neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.

“In fact, the job of a Prabodhak was exactly the job that the para teachers carried out in the projects and if the Government felt that the experience gained by them should not be lost and in that regard granted them age relaxation, provided they fulfil the condition of being within the age limit at the time of their initial appointment in the project, no fault can be found with the same.”

The court dismissed a batch of 47 appeals challenging the selection of candidates with experience in government educational projects in the 2008 recruitment process for 20,060 posts of Prabodhak in Rajasthan.

The Rajasthan government initiated the Shiksha Karmi Project in 1987, with support from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). The project aimed to address challenges such as teacher absenteeism, low enrolment rates, high dropout rates, and inadequate access to education in remote rural areas. Local youth underwent basic training and served as Shiksha Karmis, teaching children in various types of schools. These educators were compensated with a fixed honorarium for their services.

To extend educational access to children residing in remote and challenging locations such as Dhanis (small villages in difficult terrains), the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, was amended to establish a new cadre known as Prabodhak and Senior Prabodhak.

The court ruled that the age relaxation was neither arbitrary nor discriminatory. Additionally, the court upheld the guidelines that awarded bonus marks to candidates with experience in government educational projects. These guidelines were seen as complementary to the existing rules rather than replacing them, offering a rational basis for acknowledging the valuable experience gained by teachers in demanding rural educational initiatives, according to the court's opinion.

The court emphasized that policies regarding age relaxation and bonus marks fall within the purview of executive decisions and should only be scrutinized if they are evidently discriminatory or arbitrary.

Concluding that both the age relaxation and the award of bonus marks were justified and rational, consistent with the objectives outlined in the Rules of 2008, the court dismissed the appeals. It upheld the recruitment process as conducted.

Case no. – Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010

Case Title – Mahesh Chand Bareth & Anr. v. State Of Rajasthan & Ors.