समायोजित शिक्षकों को अनापत्ति प्रमाणपत्र (एनओसी) की जरूरत नहीं, इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट ने कहा- चयन के बाद मांगी जाए अनापत्ति

 इलाहाबाद : इलाहाबाद हाई कोर्ट ने 16448 शिक्षकों की भर्ती में समायोजित सहायक अध्यापकों को अनापत्ति प्रमाणपत्र के बिना भी काउसिंलिंग में शामिल करने का निर्देश दिया है। कोर्ट ने कहा है चयनित होने के बाद विभाग से अनापत्ति प्रमाण पत्र दाखिल करने की समायावधि नियत की जाए। कोर्ट ने बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद से चार हफ्ते में जवाब मांगा है और याचिका की सुनवाई 17 अक्टूबर को तय की है।

यह आदेश न्यायमूर्ति मनोज मिश्र ने संदीप कुमार चौरसिया व छह अन्य शिक्षा मित्र से सहायक अध्यापक बने याचियों की याचिका पर दिया है। याचिका पर अधिवक्ता अनिल सिंह बिसेन व अग्निहोत्री कुमार त्रिपाठी ने बहस की। उनका कहना है कि शिक्षा मित्रों को सहायक अध्यापक बनाने का मामला सुप्रीम कोर्ट में लंबित है। इन्होंने दूरस्थ शिक्षा के तहत बीटीसी प्रशिक्षण प्राप्त किया है। सचिव बेसिक शिक्षा परिषद इलाहाबाद ने 16 जून 16 को 16448 सहायक अध्यापकों की भर्ती का विज्ञापन निकाला है। यह भर्ती प्रदेश के प्राइमरी स्कूलों में की जा रही है। याचीगण ने भी आवेदन दिया है किंतु परिषद के सचिव ने 16 अगस्त 16 को परिपत्र जारी कर काउसिंलिंग में अन्य जगहों पर कार्यरत अभ्यर्थियों को अनापत्ति प्रमाण पत्र पेश करने पर ही भाग लेने की अनुमति देने का आदेश दिया है। 

परिषद के वकील एके यादव का कहना है कि एक व्यक्ति दो स्थानों पर नियुक्ति न पा जाय इसलिए यह आदेश हुआ है। कोर्ट ने इसे गलत मानते हुए कहा कि आदेश तर्कसंगत नहीं है। कोर्ट ने कहा-चयन के बाद मांगी जाए अनापत्ति

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

Court No. - 7 

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 39058 of 2016 

Petitioner :- Sandeep Kumar Chaurasiya And 6 Ors. 

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. 

Counsel for Petitioner :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Anil Kumar Singh Bishen 

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav 

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. 

According to the petitioners, they were earlier appointed as Shiksha Mitra and, thereafter, they obtained two years BTC course certificate through Open and Distance Learning Method after obtaining requisite permission and, thereafter, they were absorbed on the post of Assistant Teacher and are stated to be working in primary schools in the district of Allahabad. The appointment of Shiksha Mitra as an Assistant Teacher is a subject matter of litigation which is pending in the Apex Court. 

Being apprehensive in respect of their future, the petitioners also applied pursuant to Government Order dated 16.06.2016 for appointment as Assistant Teacher against 16448 posts notified in various primary schools under the U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad. 

The grievance of the petitioners is that, on 16.08.2016, the Secretary, U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad had issued a circular addressed to all the Basic Shiksha Adhikari within the State of Uttar Pradesh thereby requiring them to allow a candidate, who is already employed elsewhere, to appear in counselling only if he has obtained a 'No Objection Certificate' from his employer. It is the prayer of the petitioners that no such condition was imposed either in the Government Order or in the advertisement and, therefore, the petitioners have been taken by surprise and as the counselling is on, it is quite possible that before the petitioners are able to obtain 'No Objection Certificate' from their employers, the counselling would be over and the posts would be filled up. It is thus the prayer of the petitioner that the order dated 16.08.2016 be quashed. 

Sri A.K. Yadav, who appears for the respondent nos.2 and 3, has submitted that the circular dated 16.08.2016 is in the nature of supplementary instructions which has been issued in public interest because no person can have two appointments simultaneously and, therefore, before a person seeks another appointment, it is quite logical that he should have a 'No Objection Certificate' of the employer where he is already employed. 

I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Prima facie, this Court is of the view that such candidates, like the petitioners, can be permitted in counselling and if they are selected for appointment, a time frame can be fixed requiring them to submit 'No Objection Certificate' from their previous employer. But issuing a blanket ban in their participation, without the 'No Objection Certificate' from their employers, may not be reasonable. 

The matter requires consideration. 

Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 4; and Sri A.K. Yadav has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3. They pray for and are allowed four weeks time to file counter affidavit. Two weeks thereafter shall be for the petitioners to file rejoinder affidavit. 

List this petition on 17.10.2016. In the meantime, it is provided that the respondents would not prohibit the petitioners from participating in the counselling, pursuant to their applications, against vacancies notified under the Government Order dated 16.06.2016 on the ground that they do not have No Objection Certificate from their employer. However, in case the petitioners are selected it would be open to the respondents to fix a time frame for submission of 'No Objection Certificate'of their employer. 

Order Date :- 23.8.2016 

AKShukla/-