Smt. Jayanti Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5378 MP

1                                         W.P.No. 19740/2019

             HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         BENCH AT GWALIOR
                             SINGLE BENCH
                    JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
                 WRIT PETITION NO. 19740/2019
                    Smt. Jayanti Sharma & Ors.
                              versus
                       State of M.P. & Ors.

===============================================
Shri R.D.Jain, learned senior counsel with Shri Anil Sharma,
learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri G.P.Chaurasiya, learned Dy. Government Advocate for
respondents/ State.
===============================================
                             ORDER

(Delivered on this day of September, 2021)

The petitioners have aggrieved by the order dated

27/08/2019 passed in revisional jurisdiction by Commissioner,

Gwalior Division, Gwalior in Revision No. 0057/2017-

18/Revision; whereby, the revision preferred by petitioners has

been dismissed and the order dated 28/3/2018 passed by

Additional Collector, District Gwalior in case No.

75/Appeal/2016-17 has been affirmed. The Additional Collector

vide its order dated 28/3/2018 affirmed the termination order dated

28/3/2016 passed by Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat,

Morar, Gwalior. By the order dated 28/3/2016, CEO, Janpad

Panchayat, Morar has terminated the services of petitioner on the

ground that he has obtained D.Ed/B.Ed. Degree from Bhartiya

Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow which is not a recognized

Council/Institution by the National Council for Teachers

Education (NCTE).

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners referred

the judgment passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in the case

of Sadhu Singh Gurjar & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.

(W.P.No. 1460/2015 decided on 10/11/2016); wherein, in similar

circumstances, petition filed by petitioners therein has been

allowed with certain directions. It is further submitted that almost

in identical fact situation, coordinate Bench at Indore in the case

of Dilip Patel Vs. School Education Department & Ors.

(W.P.No. 7263/2016 decided on 16/2/2017) relying on relevant

judgments passed by this Court including the case of Vishal Singh

Dangi and Anr. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. (W.P.No. 4574/2014

decided on 4/8/2014) and Virendra Jarewal Vs. State of M.P. &

Ors. (W.P.No. 918/2015 decided on 30/1/2017) passed a detailed

order. He seeks parity vis-a-vis said order.

3. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand, opposed the

prayer. However, he could not dispute passing of said orders and

the fact that case of petitioners also pertains to taking degree from

Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad, Lucknow.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through

Video Conferencing and perused the documents annexed with the

petition.

5. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sadhu

Singh Gurjar (supra) passed the order in following manner:-

"7. Shri R.D.Jain, learned senior counsel contends

that the decision of the respondents that Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad Lucknow, from where the B.Ed./D.Ed. Certificates were obtained by the petitioners is not recognized by the NCTE, is not legally correct as the said institute is recognized by the University Grants Commission and hundreds of teachers, who have obtained D.Ed.,/B.Ed., certificates from this institution are now working as full fledged teachers in different States including the State of U.P. That apart, the syllabus, standard of institution are not less than the institutions recognized by NCTE. Besides, its recognition by different States suggests that non-recognition of such institution by NCTE in fact and in effect is an arbitrary action and does not conform to concept of equality as enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For no fault on the part of the petitioners, qualified degree/diploma courses obtained by them have been illegally put to grave prejudice for no justifiable reason. Petitioners have continued as Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade II/III for last more than ten years with unblemished service record. As such, their efficiency, ability and performance have been well adjudged as a member of teaching faculty and, therefore, their right of absorption in Adhyapak Samvarg upon completion of three years successful tenure as Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade II/III ought not to have been obstructed only for the reason that the B.Ed./D.Ed., certificates obtained eleven years ago from Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad Lucknow are not recognized by the NCTE, albeit recognized by the UGC.

However, Shri Jain has shown his grace and

submitted that though petitioners are well qualified with sound knowledge and experience in teaching but are still required to obtain B.Ed./D.Ed. qualification from any of the Institute recognized by the NCTE. The order dated 04.08.2014 passed by the Zila Panchayat, Ujjain renewing the term of the contract of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-II/III for further three years for enabling them to acquire D.Ed.,/B.Ed., qualification as per NCTE norms is well in conformity with the principles of justice, equity and good conscience. It is submitted that after having rendered much more than the required length of service to be absorbed in the Adhypak Samvarg, only for the reason that at the time of their appointment, D.ED.,/B.Ed., qualification has been acquired by them from an institution not recognized by the NCTE, they have been deprived of livelihood. Petitioners are, therefore, entitled to seek parity on the touch stone of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and equitable consideration. Hence, Shri Jain, learned senior counsel submits that such teachers who are already absorbed in Aadhyapak samvarg may not be discontinued and force them to work as Assistant Grade-II/III and their term may be renewed affording opportunity to qualify D.Ed.,/B.Ed., from such institution recognized by the NCTE. The said teachers who are still working as Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade- II/III and still to be absorbed in Aadhyapak samvarg may be continued as such and their term may be renewed with a condition to acquire D.Ed.,/B.Ed., qualification from an institution recognized by the NCTE for absorption in the Adhyapak Samvarg.

8. Prayer appears to be reasonable. There is no dispute that petitioners have so far performed duties as teachers either as Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade II/III or in Adhyapak Samvarg with utmost satisfaction of the superiors with unblemished service record. They have completed more than ten years of service as on date. Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad Lucknow though is not in the list of recognized institute of the NCTE but undisputedly is recognized by UGC, a higher body and/or above NCTE. Teachers having obtained D.Ed./B.Ed. from such institute are serving as teachers in different States. Therefore, it is equitable that the petitioners are permitted to continue in their respective cadre either in the Adhyapak Samvarg, if they are already absorbed or in Samvida Shala Shikshak Varg II and III, further for a period of three years and an opportunity is extended to them to obtain D.Ed./B.Ed. qualification, as the case may be, from the instituterecognized by the NCTE.

9.With the aforesaid directions, all the writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs."

6. In the case of Dilip Patel (supra), the coordinate Bench of this Court at Indore has discussed the fallout of other litigations including the case of Vishal Singh Dangi (supra) and Virendra Jarewal (supra) and thereafter relying upon the case of Sadhu Singh Gurjar (supra) passed the order in following manner:-

"By virtue of the aforesaid judgment, the Teachers working in Adhyapak Samvarg have been granted 3 years time to obtain D.Ed., / B.Ed., Degree. The petitioners are working as Samvida Shala Shikshak

Grade 3. They have proved their worth by qualifying the examination conducted by the M.P. Professional Examination Board in the year 2011 and, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that after taking into account all the judgments delivered on the subject, this Court is in agreement with the view expressed by the learned Single Judge in the case of Sadhu Singh Gurjar (supra) and, therefore, it is equitable that the petitioners are permitted to continue in their respective cadre in the Adhyapak Samvarg, if they have already been absorbed, or Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade 2 / 3, for a further period of three years and an opportunity is extended to them to obtain D.Ed., / B.Ed., Qualification as the case may be from the Institute recognised by the NCTE.

With the aforesaid, both the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs."

7. In view of above two judgments passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court, this Court intends to tread on same path and thus, petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

"(i) Impugned orders dated 27/08/2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior, order dated 28/3/2018 (Annexure P/2) passed by Additional Collector,District Gwalior and order dated 28/3/2016 (Annexure P/3) passed by Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Morar, Gwalior are hereby modified to the extent that petitioners are permitted to continue in their respective cadre in the Adhyapak Samvarg, if they have already been absorbed, or Samvida Shala

Shikshak Grade 2 / 3, for a further period of three years and an opportunity is extended to them to obtain D.Ed., / B.Ed., qualification as the case may be from the Institute recognised by the NCTE."

8. Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.

(Anand Pathak) Judge

jps/-

JAI       Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH
          SOLANKI
          DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
          PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH


PRAKASH
          COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
          GWALIOR, postalCode=474001,
          st=Madhya Pradesh,
          2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecd


SOLANKI
          f179cec865c7633f4cfb9e38ce14fcbb0
          5b9522a, cn=JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI
          Date: 2021.09.14 19:38:49 +05'30'