Allahabad High Court
Sadhna vs State Of U P And 3 Others on 23 March, 2021
Bench: Salil Kumar Rai
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13785 of 2020
Petitioner :- Sadhna
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendu Ojha,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ras Bihari Pradhan
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Despite previous order dated 9.2.2021 passed by this Court, the Standing Counsel has not obtained instructions.
It would be futile to grant further time to the Standing Counsel to obtain instructions as the issues raised in the present writ petition is an issue of law and no disputes regarding facts are involved in the case. The question of law arising in the present writ petition has already been decided by the previous judgements of this Court delivered in Writ A No.23961 of 2018, Writ A No.5981 of 2019 and Writ A No.8528 of 2019.
The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School Mahurasa, Block Sadat, District Ghazipur vide order dated 5.9.2018 and joined as such on 19.9.2018. However, the salary of the petitioner was withheld on the ground that she had obtained her diploma in Elementary Education in 2011 after her intermediate examination and completed her Graduation in 2014 and cannot therefore, be considered as a trained teacher.
In Writ A No.5981 of 2019 identical issue was involved and this Court observed as follows:
" From a perusal of the written instructions filed by the District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad, it is evident that objection taken to the teachers training qualification possessed by the petitioner is that the eligibility qualification for admission to the said training course is 10+2 (Intermediate) examination, whereas as per Rule 2(1)(q) of the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1981'), the teachers training course should be that as recognized by the Government or NCTE and wherein eligibility qualification should be graduate. The objection being raised by the District Basic Education Officer on the said issue has been dealt with by this Court in the judgment and order dated 17.4.2019 in Writ-A No. 23691 of 2018 (Vikram Singh and 4 others vs. State of U.P. and 3 others).
Further, the fact in the instant case that the petitioner had completed graduation course before completion of diploma in Elementary Education (Teachers Training Course) is not disputed.
Reference may also be made to the norms and standards for diploma in elementary teacher education Programme leading to Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.ED) as contained in Appendix-2 of NCTE Regulations 2014 which provides eligibility for admission to the training course. Relevant Clause '3.2' reads as under:-
"3.2 Eligibility (a) Candidates with at least 50% marks in the higher secondary (10+2) or its equivalent examination are eligible for admission.
(b) The reservation and relaxation in marks for SC/ST/OBC/PWD and other categories shall be as per the rules of the Central Government/State Government, whichever is applicable."
The standards for Elementary Education Programme fixed by the NCTE Rule, 2014 would prevail over the provisions as contained in Rule 2(1)(q) of 1981 Rules as the NCTE Rules 2014 is the central legislation.
For the aforesaid, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not eligible for being appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher having been qualified in the Assistant Teacher Recruitment Examination-2018.
However, as to the diploma course being recognized by N.C.T.E. or genuineness or correctness thereof, it is always open for the District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad to make an enquiry after issuance of appointment letter.
The respondent no. 4 is, therefore, directed to issue an appointment letter to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.
Subject to the above, the writ petition is allowed."
In view of the law laid down in the aforesaid case, the present writ petition is also allowed.
The order dated 17.10.2020 passed by the Secretary, U.P Basic Shiksha Parishad, Prayagraj is hereby quashed.
The respondent nos.3 & 4 i.e., the District Basic Education Officer, Ghazipur and the Finance and Accounts Officer, office of the District Basic Education Officer, Ghazipur are directed to pay salary to the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in the Primary School and not to interfere in her functioning as Assistant Teacher in pursuance to the order dated 17.10.2020.
It is further directed that the arrears of salary and another consequential monetary benefits accrued in favour of the petitioner shall be paid within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is served on respondent nos. 3 & 4 and future salary be paid month to month in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is allowed.
Order Date:23.3.2021
IB
