Umesh Chandra Yadav vs State Of U.P.And 5 Ors.
2023 Latest Caselaw 8734 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 52002 of 2013
 

 
Petitioner :- Umesh Chandra Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 5 Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- R.C.Yadav,Akhilesh Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., ,Bharat Pratap Singh,Dhananjay Awasthi,R.A.Akhtar
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard Sri S.N. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Akhilesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Bharat Pratap Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.2-Regional Committee of National Council for Teachers Education, and learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1, 3 and 4.

Present petition has been filed praying for the following main reliefs:

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 28.12.2012 and 23.05.2013 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Azamgarh i.e. Respondent No.5 and the Government Circular dated 08.10.2012 to the extent imposing restriction for applying for Primary Teachers Recruitment-2012 in academic qualification having diploma/degree/certificate from Institution situated at place outside the State of Uttar Pradesh.

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue the appointment letter to the petitioner for the post of Assistant Teacher in the Primary Institution."

It is the case of the petitioner that he applied for the post of Assistant Teacher having B.T.C. Certificate issued from the State of Madhya Pradesh and that was the sole basis of non-consideration for the post of Assistant Teacher.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by Full Bench in the case of Jitendra Kumar Soni Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh decided on 13.08.2010 by which all the candidates who have been obtained B.T.C. certificate from outside of Uttar Pradesh, have been considered to be eligible for the post of Assistant Teacher.

Per contra, learned Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the prayer made by the petitioner.

The counter affidavit filed by learned Standing Counsel is silent over the applicability of the Full Bench Judgment rendered before this Court. The Co-ordinate Bench while directing the respondent authorities to decide the representation in the light of the aforesaid judgment and the same has not been considered while passing the impugned order dated 23.05.2013 by which cause of action arose to prefer the instant petition before this Court. The stand has been taken that the judgment passed in the case of Jitendra Kumar Soni (supra) is squarely covered with the case of the petitioner. The impugned orders dated 28.12.2012 and 23.05.2013 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent authorities are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for the post of Assistant Teacher in pursuance of Certificate obtained from other State i.e. Madhya Pradesh, if there is no other legal impediment for considering the eligibility criteria of the petitioner.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

Order Date :- 24.3.2023

Atul