Chattisgarh High Court
Ajay Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 August, 2022
Page 1 of 34
AFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Reserved On : 22.07.2022, 25.07.2022 & 28.07.2022
Delivered On : 23.08.2022
WPS No. 5051 of 2021
Namita Diwan, D/o Shri Chandan Singh Diwan, Aged About 27
Years, R/o Bijrapali, Bhurkoni, Tehsil- Pithora, Mahasamund
(C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of School
Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block - C, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar
Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3. Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of
School Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block - C, 1 st Floor, Atal
Nagar Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4. Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Its
Secretary, Shailendra Nagar - Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5. Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Bastar Division
(C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 2429 of 2022
Vikas Kumar, S/o Shri Jugal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Village Ghumanidand, Post Jatga, Tahsil Pondi Uprora, Thana
Bango, District- Korba (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon
(C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 2696 of 2022
Pratima, S/o Late Shri Bharat Lal Verma, Aged About 31 Years,
R/o Village and Post Anandgaon, Tahsil and Thana Berla,
District- Bematara (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3582 of 2022
Keshaw Kumari, D/o Shri Tilakdas, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Village Salonikaka, Tahsil Bhatgaon, District- Balodabazar-
Bhatapara (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post Office and Police
Station Rakhi, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Balodabazar, District - Balodabazar
(C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3862 of 2022
Reetu Paikra, W/o Shri Vashudev Singh, Aged About 26 Years,
R/o Village Sargaon, Post Salka, Tahsil and Thana Udaipur,
District - Surguja (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3868 of 2022
Ajay Kumar, S/o Shri Laxman Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Village Mungelidih, Post Gochhiya, Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara,
Thana Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3884 of 2022
Meena Toppo, D/o Shri Babulal Toppo, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Village Khedaaama, Post Lailunga, Tahsil and Thana Lailunga,
District - Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3888 of 2022
Satishwar Prasad, S/o Shri Sonsai Ram, Aged About 42 Years,
R/o Village Bachwar, Post Bachwar (Shankargarh), Tehsil
Shankargarh, District- Balrampur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and P.S. Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3900 of 2022
Buddheswar Prasad Patel, S/o Shri Shankar Lal Patel, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o Village Sarra, Post Deosundra, Tahsil
Pallari, District - Balodabazar-Bhathapara (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3901 of 2022
Anita Markam, D/o Shri Sukhi Ram Markam, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Village Dandbachhali, Post Tenganmada, Tahsil
Belgahna, Thana Kota, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3904 of 2022
Sonsai Sahu, S/o Shri Ramat Lal Sahu, Aged About 35 Years,
R/o Village Ganesh Khapri, Post Mahrum, Thana Deori Tahsil
Dondi, Thana Deori, Tahsil Dondi Lohara, District- Balod (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3931 of 2022
Preetam Lal Padoti, S/o Late Shri Ramratan Padoti, Aged About
43 Years, R/o Village Patheshri, Post Tumdibod, Tahsil
Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3933 of 2022
Manees Kumar Meshram, S/o Shri Gorelal Meshram, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Village and Post Kodikasa, Tahsil Ambagarh
Chowki, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 3947 of 2022
Shailendra Kumar Verma, S/o Shri Aatma Ram, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Village Kurlu, Post Parpodi, Tahsil Saja, District -
Bemetara (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4027 of 2022
Jai Prakash Sahu, S/o Shri Kamlesh Sahu, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Ajad Chowk, Village and Post Kendri Block and Tahsil
Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4183 of 2022
Shailesh Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Ramdeni Singh, Aged About 26
Years, R/o Village and Post Chandranagar, Tahsil Ramanujganj,
District - Balrampur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4340 of 2022
Kundan Singh, S/o Shri Bisalik Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Village Gahira-Nawagaon, Post Khertha Bazar, Tahsil Dondi
Lohara, District- Balod (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post and Police Station
Rakhi, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4475 of 2022
Deepak Kumar Kumbhkar, S/o Shanker Lal, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Village- Kharora, Tah.-Tilda, P.S. Kharora, District-
Raipur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department of
School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan Nawa - Raipur, Atal Nagar,
District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Department of School
Education, Govt. of C.G., Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal
Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4636 of 2022
Tej Singh Paikra, S/o Raisingh Paikra, Aged About 36 Years,
Meel Para Bendarchuwa, Post Kodgar, Tahsil Pendra, District-
Bilaspur, Now Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of School
Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block-C, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar,
Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3. Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Department of
School Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block-C, 1st Floor, Atal
Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4. Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Its
Secretary, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5. District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4641 of 2022
Bhoj Pratap Singh, S/o Shankar Singh, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o House No. 126, Ward No. 10, Nawaripara Shankargarh
Pithampur, Pendra, District- Bilaspur, Now Gaurela- Pendra-,
District - Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Department of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of School
Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block- C, 1st Floor Atal Nagar,
Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
3. Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Department of
School Education, Indrawati Bhawan Block- C, 1 st Floor, Atal
Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
4. Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Its
Secretary, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5. District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 5460 of 2021
Purnima, D/o Vishnu Dayal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Maa
Sharda Residency, Mopka, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department of
Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal
Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director Directorate, Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan,
Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer Kabirdham, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4594 of 2022
Abhishek Kumar Nirmalkar, S/o Ramkumar Nirmalkar, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Pathak Para, Takhatpur Ward No. 6, Police
Station Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur,
District - Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
Raipur (C.G.)
3. The District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4691 of 2022
Reena Dehare, W/o Shri Bhagyesh Kumar Sahu, Aged About 39
Years, R/o M.I.G.- 69 Kabir Nagar Tatibandh, Police Station
Tatibandh, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur
(C.G.)
2. The Director, Public Education Directorate Raipur, District-
Raipur (C.G.)
3. The District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4683 of 2022
Satish Kumar Sahu, S/o Baijnath Sahu, Aged About 34 Years,
R/o Village -Kosla, Block Pamgarh, District- Janjgri-Champa
(C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur,
District- Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3. The District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4602 of 2022
Sukhdev Prasad Lahre, S/o Narad Lal Lahre, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Village - Lohrakot, Block - Jaijaipur, District - Janjgir -
Champa (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur
(C.G.)
2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
Raipur (C.G.)
3. The District Education Officer Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
WPS No. 4597 of 2022
Onkar Prasad Sahu, S/o Harishchandra Sahu, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Utai, Post Utai, Block Drug, District- Durg (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantrala, Nawa Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
Raipur (C.G.)
3. The District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
AND
WPS No. 4606 of 2022
Rekhlal, S/o Ramnarayan, Aged About 35 Years, Resident of
Morid, Post - Dundera, Block Patan, District- Durg (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur
(C.G.)
2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
Raipur (C.G.)
3. The District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Mr. Ghanshyam
Kashyap, Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Mr. Faisal
Akhtar, Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Mr. Anchal
Kumar Matre, Mr. Purnendra Khichariya,
Advocates.
For State : Mr. Amrito Das, Additional A.G., Mr.
Sandeep Dubey, Dy. A.G. & Mr. Sunita
Jain, Govt. Advocate. & Mr. Ravi Bhagat,
Dy. Govt. Advocate.
C.G. Examination Board : Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pandey & Mr. Anadi
Sharma, Advocates.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
C.A.V. ORDER
1. As a common question of law and facts are involved in all the
aforesaid bunch of Writ Petitions, they are heard analogously
and are being disposed of by this common order. For sake of
convenience WPS No. 5051 of 2021 is being treated as lead
case.
2. WPS No. 5051 of 2021, WPS No. 3884 of 2022, WPS No. 3868
of 2022, WPS No. 3900 of 2022, WPS No. 4027 of 2022, WPS
No. 2696 of 2022, WPS No. 3582 of 2022, WPS No. 3901 of
2022, WPS No. 2429 of 2022, WPS No. 3862 of 2022, WPS No.
5460 of 2021, WPS No. 3931 of 2022, WPS No. 4183 of 2022,
WPS No. 3888 of 2022, WPS No. 3933 of 2022, WPS No. 3904
of 2022, WPS No. 3947 of 2022 & WPS No. 4340 of 2022 were
reserved for orders on 22.07.2022. WPS No. 4475 of 2022,
WPS No. 4636 of 2022 & WPS No. 4641 of 2022 were reserved
for orders on 25.07.2022. WPS No. 4594 of 2022, WPS No.
4691 of 2022, WPS No. 4683 of 2022, WPS No. 4602 of 2022,
WPS No. 4597 of 2022 & WPS No. 4606 of 2022 were reserved
for orders on 28.07.2022.
3. The petitioners have filed the present petitions against the
impugned order (Annexure-P/1) by which the candidature of the
petitioners through direct recruitment for the post of Assistant
Teacher/Teacher has been rejected on the count that the
petitioners have secured less than 50% marks in Higher
Secondary or in the Graduation as the case may be.
4. The facts reflected from the record are that respondent No. 2 has
issued an advertisement for appointment on the post of Assistant
Teacher (E Cadre), Assistant Teacher (T Cadre), State Cadre,
Division Cadre & District Cadre posts. The advertisement was
issued for Lecturer, Teacher, Assistant Teacher, Assistant
Teacher (Science), Assistant Teacher (Laboratory), Assistant
Teacher (English), Assistant Teacher (English Medium Arts
Group), Assistant Teacher (English Medium Science Group).
Clause (1) of the advertisement provides eligibility criteria for
direct recruitment. The minimum qualification for various posts
has been prescribed in the advertisement which are as under:-
"2- U;wu re 'kS { kf.kd vgZ r k;sa%& vH;FkhZ ds ikl lsok ds
fy;s fuEukuqlkj U;wure 'kS{kf.kd vgZrk,W gksuk vko';d gS%&
(,d) lgk;d f'k{kd
(d) U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok
blds led{k) rFkk izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (pkgs mls fdlh Hkh uke
ls tkuk tkrk gks) esa f+}o"khZ; fMIyksek
vFkok
U;wure 45% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds
led{k) ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (pkgs mls fdlh Hkh uke ls tkuk
tkrk gks) esa f+}o"khZ; fMIyksek tks jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn
(ekU;rk] ekun.M vkSj fdz;kfof/k) fofu;e] 2002 ds vuqlkj izkIr
fd;k x;k gksA
vFkok
U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds
led{k) ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (ch-,y-,M-) esa pkj o"khZ; Lukrd
vFkok
U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds
led{k) rFkk izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (fo'ks"k f'k{kk'kkL=) esa f}o"khZ;
fMIyksek
vFkok
Lukrd rFkk izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (pkgs mls fdlh Hkh uke ls
tkuk tkrk gks) esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek
vFkok
U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk Lukrd rFkk ch-,M- vgZrk (jk"Vªh;
v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn ls ekU;rk izkIr laaLFkku ls Lukrd) Hkh
d{kk 1 ls 5 rd i<+kus ds fy;s v/;kid ds #i esa ik= gksaxs
ijUrq ;g fd mls fu;qfDr ds i'pkr jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk
ifj"kn }kjk ekU;rk izkIr izkFkfed f'k{kk'kkL= esa 6 eghus ds ,d
fo'ks"k dk;Zdze iwjk djuk gksXkkA
rFkk
([k) jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn }kjk bl iz;kstu ds fy;s
tkjh fd;s x;s ekXkZn'khZ fl}karks ds vuqlkj leqfpr ljdkj }kjk
vk;ksftr v/;kid ik=rk ijh{kk (Vh-bZ-Vh-) esa mRrh.kZA
Vhi%& 1- mPprj ek/;fed vFkok led{k ijh{kk foKku fo"k; ds
lkFk mijksDr ekin.M esa mRrh.kZ gksuk vko';d gksxkA d`f"k
ladk; ds lkFk mPPkrj ek/;fed ijh{kk mRrh.kZ djus ij mls
foKku ladk; esa ekU; fd;k tk;sxkA O;olkf;d f'k{kk ls mPprj
ek/;fed ijh{kk mRrh.kZ vH;FkhZ dks ik=rk ugha gksxkA
2- lgk;d f'k{kd vaxzsth ek/;e ds inksa gsrq vF;FkhZ dks vaxzsth
ek/;e ls mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds led{k) ijh{kk mRrh.kZ
gksuk vko';d gksxk rFkk 'ks"k ekin.M mDr fcanq 2-(,d) lgk;d
f'k{kd gsrq fu/kkZfjr vuqlkj gksuk vko';d gSA
3- lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ds ifji= dzekad ,Q
13&[email protected]@20&rhu jk;iqj fnukad 10-01-2013 ds }kjk fo'ks"k
fiNM+h tutkfr;ksa dks Mh-,M- ,oa Vh-bZ-Vh- ls fu;qfDr ds le;
NwV jgsxhA
4- lgk;d f'k{kd ds in gsrq d{kk igyh ls ikapoh rd v/;kiu
gsrq Vh-bZ-Vh- mRrh.kZ gksuk vko';d gSA"
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
petitioners are having qualification like Higher Secondary,
Certificate of Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), B.Ed., D.Ed. and
other qualifications as prescribed in the advertisement,
therefore, they have participated in the selection examination
and cleared the examination. Accordingly, they were called for
verification of records. After verification of the records, their claim
for appointment has been rejected on the count that the
petitioners have secured less than 50% marks either in the
Higher Secondary or Graduation Examination, which are
required for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher,
Teacher as the case may be.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that since the
petitioners belong to ST category, therefore, as per
advertisement and recruitment rules namely Chhattisgarh
School Education Services (Education and Administrative
Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019, they are
entitled to get relaxation from the minimum percentage of 50%.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would refer to clause 5 of the
advertisement, which reads as under:-
"5- inks gsr q vkj{k.k %&
(1) lsok esa HkrhZ ds le;] NRrhlx<+ yksd lsok (vuqlwfpr
tkfr;ksa] vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa vkSj vU; fiNM+s oxksZa ds fy,
vkj{k.k) vf/kfu;e] 1994 (dz- 21 lu~ 1994) ds mica/k rFkk mDr
vf/kfu;e ds v/khu] 'kklu ds lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx }kjk
le;≤ ij tkjh funsZ'k ykxw gksaxsA
(2) NRrhlx<+ flfoy lsok (efgykvksa dh fu;qfDr ds fy, fo'ks"k
mica/k) fu;e] 1997 ds mica/k ds vuqlkj efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa ds
fy;s 30 izfr'kr in vkjf{kr j[ks tk;saxsA ;g vkj{k.k] leLrj
vkSj izHkkxokj gksXkkA fu;e ds mica/k ds v/;/khu jgrs gq,]
fu;qfDr;ksa esa fo/kok vFkok rykd'kqnk efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa dks
vf/keku fn;k tk;sxkA
(3) mijksDr ds vfrfjDr] fnO;[email protected] lSfud ds fy;s inksa
dks] 'kklu }kjk le;≤ ij cuk;s x;s
vf/kfu;[email protected];[email protected] vkns'[email protected]'k ds vuqlkj vkjf{kr j[kk
tk;sxkA fnO;kaxtu vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2016 (2016 dk la- 49)
ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr jkT; essa ykxw izfr'kr ds vuqlkj] inksa dk
vkj{k.k] 7 izfr'kr jgsxkA"
7. Learned counsels for the petitioners would further submit that as
per Section 29 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory
Education Act, 2009 (for shot "the Act, 2009"), there will be an
academic authority who will lying down the curriculum and
evaluation procedure under sub-section 1 and as per Rule 23 of
the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules,
2010 (for shot "the Rules, 2010"), the State Council of
Educational Research & Training, Raipur (SCERT) has been
designated as an academic authority for the State of
Chhattisgarh to carry out various responsibilities such as
formulation of curriculum, preparation of textbooks, teachers'
handbooks and teacher training. It advises the Government on
policy matter relating to school education.
8. Learned counsels for the petitioners would submit that the State
Council of Education Research & Training, Raipur has issued
guidelines for eligibility criteria to admission in B.Ed. Course in
which, it has been categorically mentioned that minimum 50%
marks is required in graduation/post-graduation examination to
admission in B.Ed. Course and 5% relaxation granted to the
SC/ST/OBC/PH candidates of State of Chhattisgarh. It has also
been contended that the Government of Chhattisgarh had
conducted Teacher Eligibility Test in the year 2011, 2012, 2016,
& 2019 as per "Chhattisgarh Teacher Eligibility Test guidelines"
the said Guidelines was framed as per the Guidelines of
National Council of Teacher Education, in which, it has been
categorically mentioned that relaxation upto 5% in the
qualification marks shall be allowed to the candidates belonging
to reserved categories.
9. It has been further contended that as per the guidelines of
National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), State Council of
Education Research & Training, Raipur & Chhattisgarh B.Ed.
Admission Rules, 2006, the reserved category candidates who
have minimum 45% marks in graduation and also have B.Ed.
degree are eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant
Teacher and the petitioners belong to the Schedule Tribe
category, therefore, they are eligible to get relaxation of 5% from
the minimum qualifying marks in the Higher Secondary or
Graduation Course. Since they have cleared TET, B.Ed./D.Ed.
and other professional qualification, which is required for
appointment of Assistant Teacher/Teacher, therefore, the
rejection of candidature of petitioners on the count that the
petitioners are having less than 50% marks, is arbitrary, illegal
and contrary to the guidelines of NCTE & guidelines/circular of
State of Chhattisgarh. It has been further contended that as per
the Rule 8(II) of Chhattisgarh School Education Services
(Education and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and
Promotion Rules, 2019, the prescribed qualification will be as
per the provisions of Right to Free and Compulsory Education
Act, 2009. It has also been contended that the National Council
for Teaching Education is academic authority under Right to Free
and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which has granted
relaxation up to 5% of qualifying marks vide notification dated
29.07.2011 for various reserved categories, therefore, the State
cannot make a rule contrary to the NCTE rules/guidelines and
would submit that the impugned order by which, their
candidature for appointment has been rejected, be kindly set
aside and the State be directed to issue appointment order in
favour of the petitioners.
10. The petitioners to substantiate their submissions have referred to
the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak & others 1, as
well as Vikas Sankhala & others Vs. Vikas Kumar Agarwal &
others2, and referred paragraph 32, 45 & 46 of Vikas Sankhala
(Supra), which are extracted below:-
"32. Coming to notification dated July 29, 2011
which was issued by the NCTE in exercise of its
power under Section 23(1) of the RTE Act,
amending its earlier notification dated August 23,
2010, the High Court proceeded to discuss as to
whether relaxation upto 5% in qualifying marks
contained therein was relatable to TET. This
question had arisen for consideration because of
the reason that writ petitioners belonging to
general category had argued that vide said
notification dated July 29, 2011 paragraph 3 of the
principal notification dated August 23, 2010 was
substituted and the context of the said paragraph 3
was totally different. After juxtaposing unamended
paragraph 3 and amended paragraph 3, the High
Court pointed out that paragraph 3 of the
notification dated August 23, 2010 dealt exclusively
with the aspect of NCTE recognised six months
special programme in elementary education by
way of training of persons with qualifications
mentioned therein after appointment. Thus, there
was neither any comprehension nor any provision
for reservation or relaxation of marks. Only
academic qualifications with minimum percentage
of marks was referred to. Therefore, concession of
5% in the qualifying marks pertained to the
percentage of marks in the qualifying examination
of Senior Secondary/graduation etc. and had no
nexus with the pass marks in the TET.
45. We find merit in the contention of the
appellants and do not agree with the respondents
that the provision for relaxation upto 5% in
qualifying marks at all relates to TET. In the first
instance, it is to be noted that insofar as qualifying
marks for TET are concerned, they are prescribed
in para 9 of the guidelines dated February 11,
2011. There is no amendment to the said para.
Amendment is incorporated in para 3 of the
1 (2018) 12 SCC 595
2 (2017) 1 SCC 350
principal notification dated February 11, 2011
which we have already reproduced above. Original
para 3 gives the rationale for including TET as a
minimum qualification. Though, it is not understood
as to why that para is substituted by the aforesaid
amended para vide notification dated July 29,
2011. Be that as it may, a reading of amended
para 3 clearly brings out that it incorporates two
aspects. First aspect touches upon the training to
be undergone by a person and this training can be
undergone by those persons who have certain
specified marks in graduation and D.Ed. (Special
Education) or B.Ed. (Special Education). Training
is for 6 months duration i.e. 6 months special
programme in elementary education. Insofar as
persons having graduation and B.Ed. qualification
are concerned, minimum marks in the graduation
or B.Ed. are also prescribed. It is stipulated that
graduation should be with at least 50% marks and
B.Ed. qualification with at least 45% marks.
However, those who have done D.Ed. (Special
Education) or B.Ed. (Special Education), no
minimum marks in obtaining those qualifications
are prescribed. What follows is that person who is
graduate with B.Ed. qualification, he/she should
have minimum 50% marks in graduation and 45%
marks in B.Ed. qualification. It is in this context
second aspect of the amended provision in sub-
para (ii) of para 3 mentions about 'Reservation
Policy' and allows relaxation upto 5% in qualifying
marks. This relaxation is, therefore, clearly
relatable to marks in graduation and B.Ed.
qualification, meaning thereby insofar as reserved
category candidates such as SC/ST/OBC/PH are
concerned, they will be treated as qualified to
undergo the training in case they pass graduation
with minimum 45% marks and B.Ed. qualification
with minimum 40% marks. We are clear in mind
that this relaxation of 5% does not relate to TET at
all. Had it been so, this notification dated July 29,
2011 would have amended para 9 and,
particularly, sub-para (a) of para 9 which deals with
concessions to reserved category candidates that
has not happened and is left intact.
46. We may mention that High Court in the
impugned judgment has also read the said
amended para 3 in the same manner we have
interpreted. We affirm the view of the High Court
on this specific aspect. We would like to reproduce
the following discussion from the judgment of the
High Court wherein additional reasons for arriving
at this particular conclusion are given:
"...This view is fortified by the letter No. F.No.61-
1/2011/NCTE/N&S dated 1.4.2011 of the NCTE
addressed, amongst others, to all Secretaries and
Commissioners of the State Governments/UTs
clarifying that following the issuance of the
notification dated 23.8.2010, it had received
representations from the State Government and
other stakeholders that in respect of SCs/STs etc.
relaxation upto 5% in the qualifying marks should
be allowed, since such relaxation is permissible by
the NCTE for admission in various teacher
education courses. Referring to the minimum
marks in the notification dated 23.8.2010, in senior
secondary (or its equivalent) or in B.A./B.Sc., it
was elucidated that following its meeting held on
16.3.2011 it was decided that relaxation upto 5% in
such qualifying marks would be available to
SCs/STs etc., in accordance with the extant policy
of the State Government /UTs and other school
managements. There is no reference of such
relaxation to pass marks in the TET. This
accommodation of the NCTE, by way of
concession of 5% marks qua the academic
qualifications, is also evident from the provisions of
the National Council for Teacher Education
(Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations,
2009 (hereinafter referred to as '2009 Regulations')
and the norms and standards for various education
courses as specified in the Appendices thereto and
referred to in the course of arguments on its
behalf. The explanation of the NCTE with regard to
the nature of the relaxation granted under the
caption "reservation policy" traceable to paragraph
3 of the principal notification dated 23.8.2010 with
reference amongst others to the 2009 Regulations
cannot be ignored or discarded."
11. Learned Additional Advocate General for the State would submit
that under Section 23 of the Act, 2009, the NCTE has laid down
the minimum eligibility qualification vide notification dated
23.08.2010. Para 1(i) of the said notification laid down the
minimum qualification prescribed for appointment of a candidate
to teach Classes I to V. Clause 1 (ii) prescribed the minimum
qualification for appointment of a candidate to teach Class VI to
VIII. The said notification was subsequently amended vide
notification dated 29.07.2011 prescribing the minimum
qualification for teaching Class I to V as was provided under
Clause 1(i) and for Classes VI to VII under Clause 1(ii). The said
notification was further partially modified vide notification dated
13.11.2019, whereby Clause 1(ii) was amended. The relevant
provision of the notification dated 23.08.2010 is extracted
below:-
"1- U;wure ;ksX;rk &
¼i½ d{kk I-V
¼d½ U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds
led{k½ ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek ¼ftl uke
ls Hkh tkuk tkrk gks½
;k
U;wure 45% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek ¼ftl uke ls Hkh
tkuk tkrk gks½] tks jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ ¼ekU;rk] ekud
vkSj fdz;kfof/k½ fofu;e] 2002 ds vuqlkj izkIr fd;k x;k gksA
;k
U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
,oa 4 o"khZ; izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= Lukrd ¼ch-,y-,M½
;k
U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
,oa f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek ¼fo'ks"k f'k{kk½
vkSj
¼[k½ jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ }kjk fu:fir ekxZn'khZ
fl)kUrksa ds v/khu mi;qDr ljdkjksa }kjk vk;ksftr [v/;kid
ik=rk ijh{kk ¼Vh-bZ-Vh-½ esa mRrh.kZ]A
¼ii½ d{kk VI-VII
¼d½ ch-,[email protected],l-lh- vkSj izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ;
fMIyksek ¼ftl uke ls Hkh tkuk tkrk gks½
;k
U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk ch-,[email protected],l-lh- ,oa f'k{kk 'kkL=
esa ,d o"khZ; Lukrd ¼ch-,M-½
;k
U;wure 45% vadksa ds lkFk ch-,[email protected],l-lh- ,oa f'k{kk 'kkL=
esa ,do"khZ; Lukrd ¼ch-,M½ tks bl laca/k esa le;≤ ij
tkjh jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ ¼ekU;rk] ekud vkSj
fdz;kfof/k½ fofu;e ds vuqlkj izkIr fd;k x;k gks
;k
U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
,oa 4 o"khZ; izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= Lukrd ¼ch-,y-,M-½
;k
U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
,oa 4 o"khZ; ch-,[email protected],llh- ,M- ;k ch-,-,[email protected],llh-,M-
;k
U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk ch-,[email protected],llh- ,oa ,do"khZ; ch-,M-
¼fo'ks"k f'k{kk½
vkSj
¼[k½ jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ }kjk fu:fir ekxZn'khZ
fl)kUrksa ds v/khu mi;qDr ljdkjksa }kjk vk;ksftr [v/;kid
ik=rk ijh{kk ¼Vh-bZ-Vh-½ esa mRrh.kZ]A"
12. He would further submit that the State of Chhattisgarh in its
exercise of power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India,
has framed the Chhattisgarh School Education Service
(Educational & Administrative Cadre) Recruitment & Promotion
Rules, 2019, prescribing the minimum qualification for
appointment of an Assistant Teacher, Teacher and Lecturer.
Under the Rules, the minimum qualification has been prescribed
in Annexure-A attached with the Recruitment Rules, 2019.
Relevant clause of Annexure-I of the Rules, 2019 is reproduced
below:-
(i) Assistant Teacher
(a) Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least
50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary
Education (by whatever name known)
OR
Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 45%
marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by
whatever name known), in accordance with the NCTE
(Recognition Norms and Procedure), Regulations,
2002.
OR
Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50%
marks and 4-year Bachelor of Elementary Education
(B.EL.Ed.)
OR
Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50%
marks and 2-year Diploma in Education (Special
Education)
OR
Graduation and two year Diploma in Elementary (by
whatever name known)
OR
Graduation with at least 50% makrs and B.Ed.
Qualification (Graduation from the institution recognized
from NCTE), shall also be eligible for appointment as
teacher for classes 1 to 5, Provided he/she undergoes,
after appointment, a NCTE recognized 6 months
special programme in Elementary Education.
And
(b) Passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be
conducted by the appropriate Government, in
accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE for
this purpose.
(ii) Teacher
(a) Graduation and 2 Year Diploma in Elementary
Education (by what ever name known)
OR
Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1 Year
Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.)
OR
Graduation 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
Higher Secondary or its equivalent with at least 50%
marks and 4 years B.A./B.Sc.Ed. Or B.A.Ed./B.Sc.Ed.
OR
Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1 year B.Ed.
(Special Graduation)
OR
(b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be
conducted by the appropriate Government in
accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for
the purpose.
13. He would further submit that the petitioners are claiming
relaxation of 5% relaxation which was provided as per the
notification dated 29.07.2011 and as per Clause 3 (ii) though
Para III of the notification dated 29.07.2011 is pertaining to the
amendment made in para 3 of the principle notification dated
23.08.2010. He would further submit that Para 3 of the
notification dated 23.08.2010 dealt with training to be undergone
and does not pertain to the minimum qualifications required for
appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher.
14. He would submit that from bare perusal of the said notification, it
is quite vivid that relaxation upto 5% in the qualifying marks was
allowed to the candidates belonging to the reserved category for
taking admission in B.Ed./D.Ed. course and does not relate to
grant of relaxation of 5% for securing employment with the State
as the appointment governs by the Rules, 2009. He would
further submit that the petitioners are trying to mix both the
relaxation and even the petitioners cannot claim relaxation of 5%
as a matter of right. Since it is a policy decision to be taken by
the appointing authority or the appropriate government, would
pray for dismissal for the writ petitions. In support of this
contention, he would refer to the judgment rendered by Hon'ble
the Supreme Court in State of U.P. Vs. Vikash Kumar
Singh3, wherein it has been held as Paragraph 7.1 as under:-
"7.1 The learned Single Judge thereafter while
quashing and setting aside the eligibility lists dated
18.03.2019 and 10.05.2019 has issued the writ of
mandamus commanding or directing the competent
authority to grant relaxation in qualifying service,
which as such was permissible under Rule 4 of the
Relaxation Rules, 2006. The word used in the
Rule 4 of Relaxation Rules, 2006 is "MAY".
Therefore, the relaxation may be at the discretion of
the competent authority. The relaxation cannot be
prayed as a matter of right. If a conscious decision
is taken not to grant the relaxation, merely because
Rule permits relaxation, no writ of mandamus can
be issued directing the competent authority to grant
relaxation in qualifying service. Therefore, the High
Court has committed a grave error in issuing the
writ of mandamus commanding the competent
authority to grant relaxation in the qualifying
service. Consequently, the High Court has also
erred in quashing and setting aside the eligibility
lists dated 18.03.2019 and 10.05.2019, which as
such were prepared absolutely in consonance with
the Rules, 1990 and Rules, 2006. The impugned
judgments and orders passed by the learned Single
Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High
Court are not sustainable in law."
15. He would further submit that the amendment as provided by way
of notification dated 13.11.2019, is applicable to those
incumbent who have already taken admission to the Bachelor of
Education of Bachelor of Elementary Education or equivalent
course prior to 29th July, 2011 and this notification is deemed to
have come into force on 29th July, 2011. From the records, it is
3 (2022) 1 SCC 347
quite vivid that the petitioners who have applied for appointment
to the post of teacher have not taken admission to the Bachelor
of Education or Bachelor of Elementary Education or equivalent
prior to 29th July, 2011, therefore, while considering their case for
appointment on the post of teacher after giving relaxation from
minimum percentage of marks in graduation cannot be
considered. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners in
WPS Nos. 2429/2022, 2696/2022, 3582/2022, 3862/2022,
3884/2022, 3904/2022, 3900/2022, 3888/2022, 3868/2022,
3901/2022, 3933/2022, 3931/2022, 3947/2022, 4183/2022,
4027/2022 & 4340/2022 have completed their B.Ed./D.Ed. after
2011 which varied from period between 2012 to 2019. He would
further submit that this relaxation for appointment of teacher of
teaching Classes VI to VIII has been provided and not for
Assistant Teachers.
16. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents placed on record with utmost satisfaction.
17. The National Council for Teacher Education, which is the
academic authority as per Section 29 of the Act, 2009, who is
competent to lay down the minimum qualifications which a
person needs to possess to make him eligible for appointment
as a teacher, has issued a notification dated 23.08.2010 laying
down such minimum qualifications, wherein, apart from the other
educational qualifications prescribed in the said notification, the
candidate should also secure qualifying marks in TET. The
relevant portion of the notification reads as under:-
"(b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be
conducted by the appropriate Government in
accordance with the Guidelines framed by the
NCTE for the purpose."
18. In furtherance of the notification dated 23.08.2010, the State of
Chhattisgarh has issued guidelines titled as Chhattisgarh
Teacher Eligibility Examination Direction, 2011. According to
clause 2(v), the minimum pass percentage of TET is 50%. The
direction further provides for 10% of relaxation to the
SC/ST/OBC candidates. The relevant clause of the direction
reads as under:-
"(v) jkT; lsok ijh{kk ds izpfyr fu;ekuqlkj vuqlwfpr tkfr]
vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks 10 % dh
NwV nsrs gq, bl ijh{kk esa ik=rk gsrq 50 % U;wure vad ykuk
vko';d gksxkA"
19. From bare perusal for the aforesaid direction, it is evident that
the authorities have conveyed its decision to grant relaxation in
minimum pass marks in TET to reserved category candidates,
the relaxation is 10%. Thus, even if the reserved category
candidates secured only 40% marks in TET, they were still
treated as a qualified candidate and were allowed to appear in
the recruitment process.
20. Hon'ble the Supreme Court while examining the correctness of
granting relaxation in TET to SC/ST/OBC has observed in
paragraphs No. 19, 38 & 47 in Vikas Sankhala (Supra), which
read as under :
"19.We may point out at the outset that insofar as
issue of concession/relaxation in TET is concerned,
it has three facets, viz.:
(i) whether relaxation in passing marks for
TET was validly given by the State
Government in its letter dated March 23, 2011
and all such candidates belonging to the
reserved categories can be treated as having
passed TET on obtaining marks as per
relaxed standards?
(ii) whether no relaxation of any nature could
be given by the State Government and,
therefore, it was incumbent upon the persons
belonging to reserved categories as well to
secure 60% marks in TET to treat them as
qualifying the said TET? OR
(iii) relaxation to the extent of 5% was
permissible, as provided by NCTE vide its
amendment Notification dated July 29, 2011
and, therefore, those who secure 55% or
above could be treated as successful in
TET?"
38. The history of events, right upto the decision of
the High Court, gives a clear glimpse of the
questions of law that need to be determined by this
Court. At this juncture, we would like to formulate
these issues, as under:
38.1 (i) Whether policy of the State as
reflected in its letter dated March 23, 2011
deciding to give relaxation ranging from 10%
to 20% in TET marks to different reserved
categories as mentioned therein is valid in
law?
38.2 (ii) Whether NCTE notification dated
July 29, 2011, which amends paragraph 3 of
its earlier guidelines/notification dated
February 11, 2011, provides 5% relaxation to
the reserved category for passing TET? If so,
whether it would be applicable to the
reserved categories in the State of Rajasthan
as well?
38.3 (iii) Whether reserved category
candidates, who secured better than general
category candidates in recruitment
examination, can be denied migration to
general seats on the basis that they had
availed relaxation in TET?
47.Thus, our answer to Question No. 2 is that
insofar as NCTE is concerned, it has not
provided any provision for relaxation in TET
examination for reserved category
candidates but has left it to the State
Governments to do the needful in this behalf,
as per para 9 of guidelines dated February
11, 2011 which remains unaltered."
21. From bare perusal of notifications of 2010 & 2011, it is quite vivid
that the relaxation of 10% in qualifying marks was not given for
recruitment process, but was granted for passing of TET
examination. Thus, the passing of TET and appointment as per
Rules, 2019 for appointment on the post of Assistant
Teacher/Teacher are completely different and the petitioners
cannot club both these things and claimed relaxation. It is quite
vivid that so far as relaxation of passing TET is concerned, it was
open to the State Government to give relaxation in favour of
reserved category as per the policy framed by them from time to
time with change in socio economic condition.
22. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that when the
petitioners were found eligible to pursue B.Ed., they cannot be
held ineligible to be considered for appointment by granting
relaxation. I am not persuaded by this submission as granting of
relaxation in essential qualification will dilute the standard of
education.
23. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of U.P. Vs. Anand Kumar
Yadav4 has held at paragraph 24 as under:-
"24. To make the right to education meaningful, a
qualified teacher undoubtedly has significant role.
In this regard we may quote with approval the
following observations dealing with the importance
of a trained teacher in the Full Bench judgment of
the High Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma(supra):
"55. ... ... ...The training of a child, that is an
integral part of child development, is
essential for his grooming, as a human mind,
without proper training is like a horse without
a bridle difficult to ride. Children in their
cradle of life with the help of teachers can
mould their lives for higher ambitions in their
manhood. To assess and mould children with
these ideals is the job of a skilled teacher and
the art of such skill is pedagogy. Teachers
have to serve the larger interest of the
society as they are building the future. Henry
Brooks Adams said, "A teacher affects
eternity; he can never tell where his influence
stops" and more appropriately Christa
Mcauliffe said " I touch the future. I teach".
This requires the possession of virtues like
sacrifice and honour which in turn brings
respect to the status of a teacher and infuses
confidence in the pupil.
56. Many children are victims of apathy and
wrongly motived parental treatment. Their
emotional and skilful assessment, and proper
treatment, has to be handled within the clinic
of an elementary school where the sole
physician is none else than a trained teacher.
A candidate possessing a mere educational
or a training qualification without any genuine
attribute may not necessarily be a good
teacher.
57. It is in this background that one may
remember those who have contributed to this
skilful art of pedagogy. In the modern world
4 (2018) 13 SCC 560
the great philosopher and Educationist
Rousseau, followed by the Swiss
Predecessor of his German Pupils,
Pestalozzi, are worth remembering. They
were followed by the famous Germans
Herbart and Froebel. The English with
Lancaster and Bell followed suit and in the
modern world it would be improper to forget
the great contributions of Maria Montessori.
58. We do not wish to pile up names but this
is only to emphasize that a great scientific
contribution has been made to this skilful art
of pedagogy. If one goes through the works
of these great people, one can understand
that child evelopment and teaching children
is no easy task and cannot be confined with
the acquisition of a couple of degrees as a
supplement to the complete attribute required
of a teacher. The narrow meaning of
qualification therefore that was being pressed
into service by Sri Rahul Agrawal cannot be
countenanced in view of the vast ocean of
understanding that is required of a skilful
teacher.
59. In the instant case the skill of the teacher
should be lined with such ingredients that it
kindles the spark of a child and balances a
group of mentally uneven children. The duty
of a good teacher is to bring the student into
contact with the learning of fruitful elements
that ensue an enduring significance in life,
affirmative information of all modes of
intellectual, systematical and practical activity
that play a major part in the building of
human mind and spirit. Their interplay is the
exercise that has to be undertaken by a
teacher. This exercise, particularly, in a class
room of infants should be underlined with
methods that are elastic enough to fit the
varying needs of different types of children.
The cultivation of mental training and
discipline is the prime object of good
teaching. We celebrate 5th of September
each year as Teachers' Day to commemorate
the birth of our late President Dr. S.
Radhakrishnan. He defined the good
qualities of a teacher as follows:
A good teacher must know how to arouse the
interest of the pupil in the field of study for
which he is responsible, he must himself be a
master in the field and be in touch with the
latest developments in his subject, he must
himself be a fellow traveler in the exciting
pursuit of knowledge ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
...
61. Describing the role model of teachers,
our Former President of India Dr. A.P.J. Abdul
Kalam, narrated his experience in his
teachers' day speech on 5th September,
2003 and said that a school must have the
best of teachers who have the ability to
teach, love teaching and build moral
qualities.
62. These are the challenges of teaching
which have been referred to in the guidelines
dated 11th February, 2011. It is in order to
ensure that the candidate is possessed of
such attributes. The guidelines further
provide that a candidate will be presumed to
have succeeded in the test if he scores 60%
or more. Some confessions have been given
for reduction in the said percentage in the
case of scheduled caste, scheduled tribes,
and other backward classes as well as
differently abled persons.
63. The reason for this is that the art of
teaching is designed to educate a child.
Education is not mere acquisition of
qualifications but is an overall development of
a child to ensure growth and development. It
is the awakening of the inner self and faculty
of the child to the ways of the world. The
teacher therefore should be possessed such
qualities that he satisfies the curiosity of a
child that enables him not only to read but to
distinguish what is worth reading. The job of
a teacher is not to fill the time-table with dull
unintelligible tasks. This violates common
sense and creativity brutally. Teaching and
training cannot be effected in the absence of
knowledge about the mind which is to receive
them.
64. It is the systematic and purposeful
construction of a personality, so that it leaves
an everlasting effect on the mind. The job of
a teacher is to get across the confidence in a
pupil, that there were good reasons for
everything the teacher did. He has to be
transparent and he cannot leave a pupil to
guess that there are any hidden answers. A
good teacher would like the pupil to lead the
way. The teacher would follow and let the
pupil know that his efforts would be
recognised. This confidence would help the
child to develop a strength in himself to cope
up with his own world by observing and
solving problems. The art of teaching should
not be confined only to oral transmissions
because what one hears one can forget.
However, what one sees, one remembers but
what one. does he understands. This is what
should teaching be comprised of. The
teacher should therefore be in a position to
infuse into a child such attributes that he or
she acquires the ability to assume
responsibility for himself/herself. A
psychological independence that enables
him/her to decide at the same time and
differentiate right from wrong. This capacity of
a child which lies concealed in him has to be
discovered in a way that the child finds this
world an interesting place to live in. For this
good teaching may be 1/4th preparation and
3/4th performance.
65. A teacher is like a professional as said by
Danny Hillis, "A layman knows he has to kick
it; and an amateur knows where to kick it; a
professional knows how hard." This quality
should be possessed professionally by a
teacher as the object of teaching a child is to
enable him to get alone without a teacher.
66. The skill of such a performance has to be
assessed because teaching is a great art to
educate youth to enable him to find out and
discover his own peculiar aptitudes or create
where none exists. A teacher has to create
inclinations in the child which may serve as
substitutes. The level of inspiration that has
to be infused in a child should be such that
he is able to make a mark in life as a
complete human being. One should
remember that "millions see the apple fall,
but Newton was the one to ask why?" The
job of a teacher at the primary level is to
generate this element of curiosity in a child.
67. For this teachers have to be attributed
with qualities that they are able to handle the
weak and the nervous, the mediocre and
intelligent with measured skill. This expertise
is a onerous task and is a substantial part of
pedagogy. To teach a child to become self
sufficient is the art which has to be developed
with caution so as not to destroy the fragile
confidence by using harsh methods. The
teacher eligibility test appears to be designed
for this purpose.
68. It is to be remembered that teachers are
to impart education to those souls who are
between the period of innocence of childhood
and the folly of youth. It is this aspect of
pedagogy to educate a child to lead life that
attains importance.
69. The art of dealing with children also
involves knowing what not to say, and on the
other hand patiently answering the
unpredictable questions of an inquisitive
child. A teacher should not give answers to
children to remember only, but he should be
able to give them problems to solve. It is then
that the potentiality of the human race is
better put to use "because a child is not a
vase to be filled but a fire to be lit." (Francois
Rabelais) . A Chinese Proverb goes a long
way to say "give a man a fish and you feed
him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you
feed him for a lifetime." Teaching is infusing
of ideas instead of stuffing the brain with
facts. William Arthur Ward a famous
educationist said that The mediocre teacher
tells, a Good teacher explains, a Superior
teacher demonstrates but the great teacher
inspires."
70. Children come from different
backgrounds often being victimised by
unwise and wrongly motived parental
treatment. The teacher has to be more
careful for he is enjoined with the duty of
child development. This therefore is the
background-in which the teachers role attains
immense significance. It is for such reasons
that the Union and the State appear to have
come up with the necessity of a teacher
eligibility test.
71. The importance of teaching and a
teacher's selection should be to find out
whether a candidate fulfils and is possessed
of such attributes, that is capable of bringing
out the best to ensure child development.
"The art of teaching is the art of assisting
discovery (Mark Van Doran)". This
compulsory attribute is therefore to be
assessed by the State while judging the
capability of a teacher and which therefore is
an essential qualification and not only a
minimum qualification. The essential nature
of this test therefore leaves no room for doubt
that mere possession of educational
qualification and a teachers training course is
not sufficient to assess the capacity of a
teacher.
72. Sir Winston Churchill while assessing the
role of a teacher observed that the Head
Masters of elementary schools have powers
at their disposal with which even Prime
Ministers have never been vested with. The
reason is that the school master has to
reckon not only with his pupils human
tendency to run, but also with the unwisdom
of parents in their early dealings with early
tendency; elimination of wrong doing, not by
plainly repressive methods is also one of the
arts that has to be possessed by a skilful
teacher.
73. All this goes to fulfil the objectives with
which Article 45 of the Constitution of India
was incorporated under the United Nations
declaration which says that mankind owes to
the child the best it has to give. An infant who
does not know how to express himself,
enters in an elementary school where he has
to be taught his initial alphas and betas. The
pronunciation, sentence-forming, elementary
grammar and understanding of his first
alphabets have to be installed in his mind
with expertise. It is for this reason that the
curriculum of the TET includes proficiency in
the language of the medium of instruction, an
optional language for a better understanding
with the student, mathematics to assess the
investigative strength of the mind and finally
environmental studies to gauge the overall
awareness of human life and nature. This has
to be coupled with moral education and
discipline and this entire combination in one
performance is the skill of a teacher. He has
to handle the weak and the nervous, the
mediocre and intelligent, with an adequate
measured skill for which a basic attribute with
intelligence is required to be possessed by a
teacher. A teacher cannot employ methods
like knocking of a child because such
methods do not always turn a timid boy into a
courageous one nor does it turn a spoilt brat
into an angel. Nonetheless it is useful to
remember Bishop Fulton J Sheen who said
"Every child should have an occasional pat
on the back, as long as it is applied low
enough and hard enough". For teachers and
guardians the proverb "Give a child enough
rope, and you will trip" is also a cautionary
note. The acquisition of such expertise is
what is desired to be assessed and that is
what the teacher eligibility test is designed
for. It is only to assess these qualities that
would qualify a teacher for being appointed
as such and therefore the teacher eligibility
test is not a mere eligibility criteria but a
qualification as prescribed in addition to the
academic and training qualifications.
74. It would be apt to quote Charles Dickens
in his famous book "Hard Times" where the
quality of a teacher has been expressed from
another angle as follows:
"What I want is facts. Teach these boys and
girls nothing but facts. Facts alone are
wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root
out everything else."
75. The role of teaching is therefore of a
mediator of learning, a parent substitute, a
controller of students' behaviour, an agent of
social change and finally a judge of
achievement. The teacher who enters a
school imparting elementary education has to
act like a group leader who can remove the
hindrances of doubts in the mind of an infant
and generate creative development. Above
all he has to in still in the mind of a youngster
all virtues of courage and honesty as this part
of education is a vital portion of child
development. It is in the early years that the
importance of education has to be preached
so as to achieve what a former U.S.
President Garfield said "Next in importance to
freedom and justice is education without
which the other two cannot be entertained."
24. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in V. Lavanya & others Vs. State of
Tamil Nadu represented by its Principal Secretary & others 5,
has examined the power of the State Government to relax 5%
5 (2017) 1 SCC 322
marks for reserved category candidates in the State Teacher
Eligibility Test and has held that it is as per the policy of the
NCTE. From the above-stated position of law, it is quite vivid that
Hon'ble the Supreme Court has upheld the relaxation for TET
only and not for appointment on the post of Teacher.
25. The judgment cited by the petitioners in Shiv Kumar Pathak
(Supra) will not come in rescue for the petitioners as in the said
judgment, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held at paragraph 17
as under:-
"17. There is no manner of doubt that the NCTE,
acting as an 'academic authority' under Section 23
of the RTE Act, under the Notification dated 31st
March, 2010 issued by the Central Government as
well as under Sections 12 and 12A of the NCTE
Act, was competent to issue Notifications dated 23
rd August, 2010 and 11th February, 2011. The
State Government was under obligation to act as
per the said notifications and not to give effect to
any contrary rule. However, since NCTE itself has
taken the stand that notification dated 11 th
February, 2011 with regard to the weightage to be
given to the marks obtained in TET is not
mandatory which is also a possible interpretation,
the view of the High Court in quashing the 15 th
Amendment to the 1981 Rules has to be interfered
with. Accordingly, while we uphold the view that
qualifications prescribed by the NCTE are binding,
requirement of weightage to TET marks is not a
mandatory requirement."
26. Thus, the qualification prescribed by NCTE is binding and
requirement of weightage to TET mark is not requirement for
appointment. From bare perusal of Rules, 2019, it is quite vivid
that the qualification prescribed in the Rules of 2019 are at par
with the qualification prescribed by NCTE and even this
judgment does not deal with the relaxation with minimum
qualifying marks in the board examination or graduation which is
essential qualification for appointment. The petitioners are trying
the mix up the relaxation granted for TET with minimum
percentage required under the rules. Both the things cannot be
treated as one and the same as the recruitment rules governs
the field of recruitment which has been framed under Article 309
of the Constitution of India and is binding force. Hon'ble the
Supreme Court in A.K. Bhatnagar & others Vs. Union of India
& others6, has examined the effect of rules made under Article
309 of the Constitution of India that it has binding effect. Hon'ble
the Supreme Court has held at paragraph 13 as under:-
"13. On more than one occasion this Court has
indicated to the Union and the State Governments
that once they frame rules, their action in respect
of matters covered by rules should be regulated by
the rules. The rules framed in exercise of powers
conferred under the proviso to Article 309 of the
Constitution are solemn rules having binding
effect. Acting in a manner contrary to the rules
does create problem and dislocation. Very often
government themselves get trapped on account of
their own mistakes or actions in excess of what is
provided in the rules. We take serious view of
these lapses and hope and trust that the
government both at the Centre and in the States
would take note of this position and refrain from
acting in a manner not contemplated by their own
rules. There shall be no order as to costs."
27. Even from bare perusal of the advertisement, the relaxation
clause i.e. clause (v) of the advertisement, it is quite vivid that it
does not provide any relaxation with regard to qualifying marks,
therefore, it is crystal clear that unless a candidate secured
minimum prescribed marks he or she is not eligible to be
considered for appointment of Assistant Teacher/ Teacher. It is
also not disputed that the person who is to be appointed teacher
should have atleast the minimum qualifying marks in the
examination prescribed so that the standard of education is not
compromised and the State Government in its wisdom has
framed the rule prescribing the qualifying minimum for
appointment which is not subject to challenge before this Court,
therefore, the writ petitions claiming benefit of relaxations
deserve to be dismissed.
28. Before parting with this case, it would be pertinent to mention
here that by restricting minimum qualifying marks to the tune of
6 (1991) 1 SCC 544
50% without any relaxation, is with an object of appointing
persons with good academic record as teacher, which cannot
said to be arbitrary even in absence of any challenge or
questioning validity of the rules, therefore, the petitioners are not
entitled to get any relaxation as reserved category candidates.
29. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are liable to be and are hereby
dismissed. No order as to cost.
30. The interim order passed earlier by this Court, if any, stands
vacated.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Arun
