INQUIRY : हाईकोर्ट ने 29334 अध्यापकों की भर्ती में अपात्रों की नियुक्ति की शिकायत पर BSA को दिया जांच का निर्देश, सैकड़ों सहायक शिक्षकों की जा सकती है नौकरी, बिना योग्यता नियुक्त किए गए विज्ञान गणित के शिक्षक

हाईकोर्ट ने 29334 अध्यापकों की भर्ती में अपात्रों की नियुक्ति की शिकायत पर BSA को दिया जांच का निर्देश, सैकड़ों सहायक शिक्षकों की जा सकती है नौकरी

_______________________________

हाईकोर्ट ने प्रदेश के उच्च प्राथमिक स्कूलों में विज्ञान व गणित के 29334 सहायक अध्यापकों की भर्ती में अपात्रों की नियुक्ति की जांच का आदेश दिया है। कोर्ट ने कहा कि शिकायतों की जिला बेसिक शिक्षा अधिकारी जांच कर कार्यवाही करें। वहीं, सूचना अधिकार कानून के तहत नियुक्त अध्यापकों की योग्यता की जानकारी भी याचियों को दी जाए। कोर्ट ने कहा कि बिना विज्ञान व गणित के स्नातक उत्तीर्ण नियुक्त अध्यापकों को सुनकर चार माह में निर्णय लिया जाए। विस्तृत आदेश में कोर्ट ने यह भी कहा है कि प्रशिक्षण प्राप्त या फिर प्रशिक्षण के अंतिम वर्ष के दौरान ही टीईटी (शिक्षक पात्रता परीक्षा) में बैठा जा सकता है। जिन्होंने प्रशिक्षण के प्रथम वर्ष के दौरान ही टीईटी पास कर नियुक्ति पा ली है, ऐसे अध्यापकों को सुनकर छह माह में बीएसए निर्णय लें। कोर्ट ने कहा कि चयन के विषय की जांच अथॉरिटी की ओर से की जानी चाहिए। इस दौरान याची अपनी शिकायतें संबंधित बीएसए से करें और वह जांच कर कार्यवाही करें। इस फैसले से सैकड़ों अध्यापकों की नौकरी जाने का खतरा है। 1यह आदेश न्यायमूर्ति अश्वनी कुमार मिश्र ने प्रभात कुमार वर्मा व 53 अन्य की याचिका को निस्तारित करते हुए दिया है। याचिकाएं 11 जुलाई 2013 की 29334 विज्ञान व गणित सहायक अध्यापकों की भर्ती में मनमानी नियुक्ति के खिलाफ दाखिल की गई हैं। ये नियुक्ति उप्र बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद की ओर से उच्च प्राथमिक स्कूलों में विज्ञान व गणित के खाली पदों पर की गई। नियमानुसार इस पद पर स्नातक में विज्ञान या गणित विषय के साथ ही टीईटी पास होना अर्हता निर्धारित रही है। याची का कहना था कि वही टीईटी की परीक्षा में बैठ सकते थे, जो सहायक अध्यापक पद पर नियुक्ति की योग्यता रखते हों, किंतु प्रथम वर्ष का प्रशिक्षण ले रहे लोगों ने भी टीईटी की परीक्षा दी और सफल होने पर उन्हें नियुक्ति दे दी गई, जबकि वह टीईटी में बैठने के योग्य ही नहीं थे।

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

Court No. - 58 

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 52021 of 2017 

Petitioner :- Prabhat Kumar Verma And 53 Others 

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 33 Others 

Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare 

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Anil Kumar Singh Bishen,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Bharat Pratap Singh,Rashmi Tripathi 


Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. 


Heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Vivek Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State - respondents, Shri Anoop Trivedi, along with Shri Vishnu Rai, for the private respondents, Shri Bharat Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 5 and 6, Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav and Shri Sanjay Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3. 

This bunch of petitions relates to appointment process initiated by the State vide Government Order dated 11th of July, 2013; whereby, 29,334 posts of Assistant Teachers in Science / Mathematics are to be filled up in various senior primary institutions run by the Board of Basic Education of the State. 

The grievance raised is two-fold; firstly, that appointments have been offered to persons who are ineligible in terms of the qualifications specified; in as much as, they do not have Science or Mathematics as one of the subjects in their graduation degree and; secondly, the persons, who had not passed training examination or were not in the final year of their training course, had also appeared in Teachers Eligibility Test (in short, 'TET'), which was impermissible, and that, such persons have also been appointed. The petitioners, therefore, contend that in the process, already undergone, appointments have been made unauthorizedly and that, the authorities must make sure that such irregularities are not committed henceforth; in as much as, the recruitment process is yet to be completed. 

The appointment, on the post in question, is required to be made pursuant to the Government Order dated 11th of July, 2013. The recruitment to the post is regulated by the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Rules of 1981'). Rule 8 of the Rules of 1981 prescribes the qualification to be possessed by a candidate for appointment to the post and the same is reproduced hereinafter:- 

"8. (1) The essential qualifications of candidates for appointment to a post referred to in clause (a) of Rule 5 shall be as shown below against each: 


Post 

Academic Qualification 

(i) Mistress of Nursery School 

Certificate of Teaching (Nursery) from a recognized training institution in Uttar Pradesh or any other training qualification recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto. 

(ii) Assistant Master and Assistant Mistress of Junior Basic School 

A Bachelor's Degree from a University established by law in India or a Degree recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto together with the training qualification consisting of a Basic Teacher's Certificate, Vishist Basic Teachers Certificate (B.T.C.) two years BTC Urdu Special Training Course, Hindustani Teacher's Certificate, Junior Teacher's Certificate, Certificate of Teaching or any other training course recognised by the Government' as equivalent thereto : 

Provided that the essential qualification for a candidate who has passed the required training course shall be the same which was prescribed for admission to the said training course. 


(2) The essential qualification of candidates for appointment to a post referred to in sub-clause (iii) and (iv) of clause (h) of Rule 5 for teaching Science, Mathematics, Craft or any language other than Hindi, and Urdu shall be as follows :- 

(i) A Bachelor's Degree from a University established by Law in India or a Degree recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto with science, Mathematics, Craft or particular language, as the case may be, as one of the subjects, and 

(ii) Training qualification consisting of a Basic Teacher's Certificate, Hindustani Teacher's Certificate, Junior Teacher's Certificate, Certificate of teaching or any other training course recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto. 

(3) The minimum experience of candidates for promotion to a post referred to in clause (b) of Rule 5 shall be as shown below against each- 

(i) Headmistress of Nursery School 


At least five years' teaching experience as permanent Mistress of Nursery School 

(ii) Headmaster or Headmistress of Junior Basic School and Assistant Master or Assistant Mistress of Senior Basic School 


At least five years leaching experience as permanent Assistant Mistress or Assistant Master of Junior Basic School, Assistant Master or Assistant Mistress of Junior Basic School and Assistant Master or Assistant Mistress of Senior Basic School. 

(iii) Headmaster or Headmistress for Senior Basic School


At least three years' experience as permanent Headmaster or Headmistress of Junior Basic School or permanent Assistant Master or Assistant Mistress of Senior Basic School as the case may be : 

Provided that if sufficient number of suitable or eligible candidates are not available for promotion to the posts mentioned at serial numbers (ii) and (iii) the field of eligibility may be extended by the Board by giving relaxation in the period of experience. 


(4) The essential qualification of candidates for appointment to the posts referred to in clause (a) and sub-clause (iii) and (iv) of clause (b) of Rule 5 for teaching Urdu language shall be as follows :- 

(i) A Bachelor's Degree from a University established by Law in India or a Degree recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto with Urdu as one of the subjects. 

Note. - A candidate who does not possess the aforesaid qualification in Urdu, shall be eligible for appointment, if he possesses a Master's degree in Urdu. 

(ii) Basic Teacher's Certificate from any of the training centres in Lucknow, Agra, Mawana in district Meerut and Sakaldiha in district Chandauli established by the Government for imparting training for teaching Urdu or any other training qualification recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto. 

(5) The essential qualifications of candidates having proficiency in Urdu for appointment to the posts referred to in sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of Rule 5 for teaching in Urdu medium shall be as follows :- 

(i) A Bachelor's Degree from a University established by Law in India or a Degree recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto. The qualifications for proficiency in Urdu will be such as may be prescribed from time to time by the Government. 

(ii) Training Qualification of two years B.T.C. Urdu special training course." 


It may be observed, at this juncture, that so far as the qualification required for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher is concerned, by the Parliamentary enactement, i.e., Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the Central Government had specified the National Council for Teachers Education (in short, 'the NCTE') as the 'academic authority' to lay down minimum qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher for students aged between 8 years to 14 years. The NCTE, in furtherance of such statutory provisions, has issued a notification on 23rd of August, 2010, laying down the qualification required for appointment to the post in question. A Full Bench of this Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others (2013 (6) ADJ 310) has been pleased to hold that qualification prescribed by the NCTE would be final and binding and the statutory Rules of 1981 as well as the qualification prescribed therein would stand subservient to the NCTE notification. The NCTE notification further required passing of TET as a qualifying examination before a teacher could be appointed to the post. Qualification under the NCTE notification dated 23rd of August, 2010 for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher is graduation with training qualification, which is reproduced: 

"1. Minimum Qualifications: 

(ii) Classes VI - VIII: 

(a) B.A./B.Sc. and 2 year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known). 

OR 

B.A. / B.Sc. with at least 50% marks and 1 year Bachalor in Education (B.Ed.). 

OR 

B.A./B.Sc. with at least 45% marks and 1 year Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations issued from time to time in this regard. 

OR 

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4 year Diploma in elementary Education (E, El. Ed.). 

OR 

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4 year B.A. / B.Sc. Ed. Or B.A. Ed. / El.Sc. Ed. 

OR 

B.A. / B.Sc. With at least 50% marks and 1 year B.Ed. (Special Education). 

AND 

(b) Pass in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose." 


The grievance of the petitioners, in this bunch of petitions, is, therefore, segregated into two and shall be dealt with one-by-one. 

The issue relating to lack of qualification on account of Science and Mathematics, not being possessed by the candidates, is, therefore, taken up first. 

Under the Rules of 1981, which have already been extracted above, the Assistant Teacher, to be appointed for Science or Mathematics, must possess a graduation degree, in which Mathematics / Science is one of the subjects. This essential qualification is, otherwise, in keeping with the schedule annexed to the Right to Education Act, as per which, at least, one teacher per class is required to be appointed for Science and Mathematics. The relevant portion of the schedule to the RTE Act of 2009 is also extracted hereinafter:- 

"(b) For sixth class to eight class: 

(1) At least one teacher per class so that there shall be at least one teacher each for - 

(i) Science and Mathematics; 

(ii) Social Studies; 

(iii) Languages. 

(2) At least one teacher for every thirty - five children. 

(3) Where admission of children is above one hundred: 

(i) a full time head - teacher; 

(ii) part time instructors for - 

(A) Art Education; 

(B) Health and Physical Education; 

(C) Work Education." 


So far as the advertisement dated 11th of July, 2013 is concerned, the same contains a specific reference to the requirement of possessing Science and Mathematics as one of the subjects in the graduation for appointment to the post in question. The NCTE Regulation, Rules as well as the Government Order; whereunder, the recruitment is being made, are consistent in that regard and there is no issue that the person, who is to be appointed to the post, must possess Science / Mathematics as one of the subjects in his/her graduation degree. 

The question, as to whether the person so appointed possesses the requisite qualification or not, therefore, becomes a question of fact to be examined by the authorities. The appointing authority is, therefore, under an obligation to ensure that only such persons are appointed on the post of Assistant Teachers who have Science / Mathematics as one of the subjects in graduation degree. Since large scale grievance has been raised by the petitioners before this Court, to the effect that persons have been appointed, who do not possess such qualification, it would be appropriate to direct the State Government to issue a specific direction to all District Basic Education Officers of the State that before a person is appointed against the post in question, it be verified that requirement of possessing Science / Mathematics as a subject in Graduation is met by the candidate. The appointing authority would also be required to specify, in the appointment letter itself, to be issued henceforth, of its satisfaction that the person appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher possesses such qualification. 

It appears that the grievance had earlier been raised before this Court in number of writ petitions that persons, who have passed their graduation without Science / Mathematics as one of their subjects, have also been appointed. The grievances, in that regard, raised in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39466 of 2014 (Satyendra Kumar Singh and 4 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), came to be decided on 11th of September, 2015 by making following observations: 

"7. However, the short submission is that as per the advertisement in order to become eligible, the candidates must possess graduation degree with one of the subject (Mathematics and Science) in the said course. 

8. It is contended that in some of the professional courses the subjects Mathematics and Science did not form part of syllabus and therefore, such candidates possessing such professional courses are not eligible. 

9. In my view, this is a factual dispute and cannot be examined by this Court, at this stage, since it requires investigation of an individual case of the candidates called for counseling. Let this examination be made by the concerned authorities at the time of counseling or in any case before making appointment. I leave it open to petitioners to raise this plea before the respondents. Further, I direct the Competent Authority to examine the eligibility of each and every candidate possessing professional course degree as to whether, he is eligible in terms of advertisement or not, i.e., whether Science and Mathematics was one of the subject in graduation course, and, thereafter only it will allow counseling. In any case the same exercise would be done by the Competent Authority before appointment, if not already done, at the time of counseling and no person ineligible shall be appointed. 

10. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of." 

The order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Satyendra Kumar Singh (supra) case had also been approved in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 261 of 2016 (Pradeep Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and 6 Others) vide order dated 6th of April, 2016, which is reproduced hereinafter: 

"9. In my view, this is a factual dispute and cannot be examined by this Court, at this stage, since it requires investigation of an individual case of the candidates called for counseling. Let this examination be made by the concerned authorities at the time of counseling or in any case before making appointment. I leave it open to petitioners to raise this plea before the respondents. Further, I direct the Competent Authority to examine the eligibility of each and every candidate possessing professional course degree as to whether, he is eligible in terms of advertisement or not, i.e., whether Science and Mathematics was one of the subject in graduation course, and, thereafter only it will allow counseling. In any case the same exercise would be done by the Competent Authority before appointment, if not already done, at the time of counseling and no person ineligible shall be appointed. 

10. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of". 

Sri Kapil Tyagi, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Syed Faiz Hasnain, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant submitted with vehemence that various incumbents of professional degree holders have been allowed for counseling, who are not at all eligible as per Government Order and advertisement and the authorities on the spot areflouting the terms and condition of Government Order and advertisement, as such present Special Appeal deserves to be allowed. 

Arguments raised, has been resisted by learned Standing Counsel by contending that whatever action has been taken on the spot at the point of time of counseling, same is strictly in consonance with the terms and conditions of the Government Order; advertisement as well as per the terms and conditions of the order dated 11.09.2015. As far as order dated 11.09.2015 is concern, said order clearly asks the authority concern to see and ensure that only such candidates are called for counselling, who fulfil the terms and conditions as has been described in the Government Order and advertisement and further in order to become eligible candidates have to possess Science and Mathematics as one of the subject in graduation course and accordingly such exercise is required to be undertaken as to whether incumbent is eligible as per the terms and conditions by having Science and Mathematics as one of the subject in graduation course. 

The directives issued by the learned Single, is not at all liable to be interfered with, but we certainly make it clear that in case the incumbents who have been called for counseling they do not fulfil the terms and conditions of the Government Order; Advertisement as well as terms and condition of the order dated 11.09.2015, then it is always open to the appellant to raise such grievance with all material particular before the authority concern and the authority concern on the basis of record would try to rectify/remedy the situation after providing opportunity of hearing to the incumbent against whom such a complaint has been made. 

Consequently, present Special Appeal is dismissed. This order has been passed in presence and with due assistance of Sri Vibhu Rai, Advocate as well as Sri A.K. Yadav, Advocate, counsel for the respondents." 

In view of the aforesaid position, the grievances raised by the petitioners, that some of the persons appointed to the post of Assistant Teachers (Science / Mathematics) have not had Science or Mathematics in graduation as one of the subjects, need not be examined by this Court, at the first instance. Such factual issues must be left to be raised and considered by the competent authority, at the first instance. 

The petitioners, therefore, shall be at liberty to raise all such factual grievance before the concerned appointing authority, i.e., the District Basic Education Officer of the district concerned, who shall examine specific instances highlighted before him after affording an opportunity of hearing to the concerned person. Such consideration would be made within a period of four months from the date of raising of specific grievance, along with certified copy of this order, before the concerned District Basic Education Officer. It is further provided that in case the petitioners ask for specific details of the qualification of person(s) already appointed, the authorities concerned shall provide such details in accordance with the provisions contained under Right to Information Act, 2005. 

This takes the Court to the next issue. According to the petitioners, the TET is a qualifying test, in which a person, possessing qualification for appointment to the post of teacher alone, can appear. It is contended that persons, who do not possess training qualification, therefore, ought not to have been allowed to appear in the TET, nor such persons could have been issued appointment letters. 

So far as conduct of TET qualification is concerned, the process was initiated pursuant to a circular issued by the NCTE dated 11th of February, 2011, which is contained in Annexure No. 10 to the writ petition. The background and rationale, as well as eligibility for appearing in the TET, have been specified, which is reproduced hereinafter: 

"Background and Rationale: 

The implementation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 requires the recruitment of a large number of teachers across the country in a time bound manner. Inspite of the enormity of the task, it is desirable to ensure that quality requirement for recruitment of teachers are not diluted at any cost. It is therefore necessary to ensure that persons recruited as teachers possess the essential aptitude and ability to meet the challenges of teaching at the primary and upper primary level. 

2. In accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009, the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) has laid down the minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in class I to VIII, vide its Notification dated August 23, 2010. A copy of the Notification is attached in the following. One of the essential qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in any of the schools referred to in clause (n) of section 2 of the RTE Act is that he/she should pass the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) which will be conducted by the appropriate Government. 

3. The rationale for including the TET as a minimum qualification for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher is as under: 

i. It would bring national standards and benchmark of teacher quality in the recruitment process. 

ii. It would induce teacher education institutions and students from these institutions to further improve their performance standards. 

iii. It would send a positive signal to all stakeholders that the Government lays special emphasis on teacher quality.

4. The TET examination may be conducted by a suitable professional body designated by the appropriate Government for the purpose. It will be conducted in accordance with the Guidelines hereunder. 

Eligibility: 

5. The following persons shall be eligible for appearing in the TET: 

i. A person who has acquired the academic and professional qualifications specified in the NCTE Notification dated 23rd August 2010. 

ii. A person who is pursuing any of the teacher education courses (recognized by the NCTE or the RCI, as the case may be) specified in the NCTE Notification dated 23rd August 2010. 

iii. The eligibility condition for appearing in TET may be relaxed in respect of a State/UT which has been granted relaxation under sub-section (2) of section 23 of the RTE Act. The relaxation will be specified in the Notification issued by the Central Government under that sub-section." 

The rationale for insisting upon TET as a qualification, before a candidate could be held eligible to be appointed as Assistant Teacher, has been specified in the circular itself. The object is to assess the essential aptitude and ability to meet the challenges of teaching at the preliminary and upper primary levels. The TET, as an examination, however, is qualifying in nature and the marks secured in it is not required to be taken note of for the purposes of determining the merit or inter se seniority of the candidates. It is in this background that while prescribing the eligibility, the NCTE itself has clarified that only those persons shall be eligible to apply, who have acquired the academic and professional qualification specified in the NCTE notification dated 23rd of August, 2010. Clause 5(ii) of the circular dated 11th of February, 2011 further provides that a person, who is pursuing any of the teacher education courses (recognized by the NCTE or the RCI, as the case may be) specified in the NCTE Notification dated 23rd August 2010, would also possess eligibility to appear in the TET examination. By the express provision made in the notification/circular itself, it is clarified that obtaining of teacher training course is not a prerequisite for appearing in the TET examination. The import of the word "pursuing" has been examined by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions with leading Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 26660 of 2013 (Rambabu Vishwakarma and 5 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others). The observation of the learned Single Judge, made on 13.05.2013, in that regard, is reproduced hereinafter: 

"The words "pursuing any of the teacher education course" occurring in the guidelines of the N.C.T.E. have been pointed out by Sri R.A. Akhtar, learned counsel for the N.C.T.E. To my mind, the same reflects the extension of such a facility to those candidates who have appeared in the final exams of their teacher education course or whose results are awaited at the final stage. This may not be for those who have just taken admission in a teacher education course/training course requiring completion in a year or two. This facility, like in the case of engineering or medical entrance test, where the candidate has already appeared in his 10+2 exams and is awaiting results, and is also eligible to appear in the entrance test is, therefore, to help such candidates who are to finally wrap up their teacher education course. 

Thus, the respondents are not to loose anything or prejudice any cause. To the contrary, this would be a correct way of implementing the guidelines of the N.C.T.E. 

Accordingly, a certified copy of this order shall be placed by the learned Standing Counsel before the State Government namely Principal Secretary (Basic Education) who shall forthwith convene a meeting in this respect and take notice of the said Eligibility conditions prescribed in the guidelines of the N.C.T.E. And issue an appropriate instruction or Government Order in the event it is found that the petitioners are also entitled to appear in the examinations according to the above mentioned guidelines by extending the date for filling up of the application forms accordingly. 

A certified copy of this order shall be provided within 24 hours to the learned Chief Standing Counsel for being communicated to the said authority for taking appropriate steps within a week. 

All the petitions stand disposed of accordingly." 


The order passed by this Court on 13th of May, 2013 in Rambabu's case (supra) has attained finality. A Government Order has also been issued by the State on 15th of May, 2013, laying down the guidelines with regard to holding of TET examination, in which this aspect has also been considered. Paragraph no. 2 of the said Government Order is reproduced hereinafter: 

"

In view of the notification issued by the NCTE dated 11th of February, 2011, as well as the Government Order issued on 15th of May, 2013, the inescapable conclusion culled out from the provision is that only those persons are eligible to appear in the TET examination who have acquired academic and professional qualification and have either obtained training qualification or are pursuing any of the teacher education courses. 

In view of the interpretation given to the word "pursuing" by this Court, which stands implemented vide Government Order dated 15th of May, 2013, it is clear that only those persons, who are in the final year of their teacher training courses, alone, would be entitled to appear in the TET examination. 

The appointing authority, therefore, is directed to ensure that before appointment letters are issued to the candidate, he/she must have passed TET after completing training course or such persons were in the final year of their training examination. A person, who does not come in either of the two categories, would not be issued any appointment order. The State Government shall implement its Government Order of 15th of May, 2013 and circulars would be issued for its strict compliance by the appointing authorities. The appointing authorities shall also clearly state such fact in the appointment letter issued to the candidates appointed as Assistant Teachers. 

This takes the Court to the last limb of petitioners' grievance, regarding those who have been appointed as Assistant Teachers, even while they had not even completed first year of their teacher training course. By way of illustration, some of the petitioners have annexed materials to show that appointment orders have been issued to persons who have passed TET even before completing first year of their training course. Such appointment orders, apparently, would be inconsistent with the Government Orders, already issued by the State Government, dated 15th of May, 2013 as well as NCTE circular dated 11th of February, 2011. 

Liberty, therefore, is reserved to the petitioners to challenge such specific appointments before the appointing authorities, i.e., the District Basic Education Officer concerned, at the first instance, who shall examine such individual grievances on facts after affording opportunity of hearing to the selected candidates. 

The process, in that regard, would be concluded within a period of six month from the date of raising such grievance, along with certified copy of this order, before the appointing authority. 

With the aforesaid observations / directions, this bunch of writ petitions stands disposed of. 

Order Date :- 8.5.2018 

Amit Mishra






INQUIRY : हाईकोर्ट ने 29334 अध्यापकों की भर्ती में अपात्रों की नियुक्ति की शिकायत पर BSA को दिया जांच का निर्देश, सैकड़ों सहायक शिक्षकों की जा सकती है नौकरी, बिना योग्यता नियुक्त किए गए विज्ञान गणित के शिक्षक Reviewed by Ram Krishna mishra on 5:21 AM Rating: 5

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Powered by Blogger.