Gavvala Kalyan Kumar vs State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 4621 Tel

   HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                   W.P.Nos.31375 & 31629of 2018



COMMON ORDER:


      Both these Writ Petitions are being disposed of by way of

common order as the issue raised in both these Writ Petitions is one

and the same.


      2.     Heard Sri S.Surender Rao, learned Senior Counsel,

representing Sri Ramesh Bura, learned counsel for the petitioners,

Sri D.Balakishan Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd

respondent and the learned Government Pleader for School

Education, appearing for other respondents.

3. For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P.No.31375

of 2018 are hereunder discussed.

4. W.P.No.31375 is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus

declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in keeping the status of the

candidature of the petitioner in pending after the Certificate

Verification, though the petitioner is fully qualified and eligible for

the post of 'School Assistant (Mathematics) T/M' in Teacher

Recruitment Test of School Education Department in pursuance to

the Notification No.52/2017 dt.21-10-2017 issued by 2nd respondent

as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 2 AKS,J W.P.No.31375 & 31629 of 2018

to 4 to consider the candidature of the petitioner and issue

appointment order to the petitioner.

5. It has been contended by the petitioners that the

petitioners are the graduates in B.Tech in Computer Science

Engineering and they are fully eligible and qualified to the post of

School Assistant (Mathematics). Learned counsel for the petitioners

has contended that the respondents have issued recruitment

Notification No.52 of 2017 on 21-10-2017. The petitioners have

responded to the said notification and have participated in the

selection process and they have clearly and decently well in the said

selections. He has further contended that the qualification prescribed

for the post of School Assistant (Mathematics) are as under:

"i) Must possess a Graduate / Post Graduate Degree in Mathematics (for its allied subjects as given in the Annexure-A) from a University recognized by UGC with 50% marks in either Graduation or Post Graduation (in case of SC / ST / BC / Differently abled candidates, the minimum marks shall be 45%) and Pass in Bachelor of Education (B>Ed.) course with Mathematics as a Methodology subject from any institution recognized by NCTE.

OR

ii) Must possess a 4-year B.A., B.Ed. / B.Sc., B.Ed., integrated degree, with at least 50% marks (In case of SC / ST / BC / Differently abled candidates, THE MINIMUM MARKS SHALL BE 45%) WITH THE Mathematics as a Methodology from any institution recognized by NCTE.

AND Pass in Paper II of Telangana State Teacher Eligibility Test (TSTET) / Andhra Pradesh Teacher Eligibility Test (APTET) / Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) with Mathematics and Science as Optional."

3 AKS,J W.P.No.31375 & 31629 of 2018

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners have further

contended that the petitioners have also completed Bachelor of

Education in Mathematics and therefore they are fully eligible and

qualified for appointment to the post of School Assistant

(Mathematics). A perusal of the recruitment notification makes it

abundantly clear that one must possess graduation or post graduation

degree in Mathematics or its allied subjects as given in the

annexure-A and annexure-A to the said notification would clearly

state that for mathematics, the allied subjects are 'applied

Mathematics', 'Mathematics and Computer Science', and

'Statistics'. As the petitioners are possessing the qualification in the

allied subjects, they are fully eligible and qualified to the post of

School Assistant (Mathematics).

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further

contended that the petitioners were permitted to participate in the

selection process in view of the orders of this Court granted on

05-08-2018 and the petitioners have secured decent marks and they

are coming within the consideration for appointment to the post of

School Assistant (Mathematics). But the respondents, after issuance

of notification has constituted an Expert Committee contrary to the

notification and based upon the report of the Expert Committee,

decided that the B.Tech degree in Computer Science is not

equivalent as allied subject and on that ground the case of the

petitioners was not being considered for the post of School Assistant 4 AKS,J W.P.No.31375 & 31629 of 2018

(Mathematics). He has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court

in Prakash Chand Meena and others Vs. State of Rajasthan and

others1, whereas the Apex Court in paras 7 and 8, held as under:

"7. It was also highlighted on behalf of the respondents that whereas there were only 62 posts of PTI Gr. II, there were 405 posts of PTI Gr. III advertised and as against such large number of 405 posts there were only limited number of applicants having qualification of CPEd and, therefore, permitting applicants having higher or equivalent qualifications was a rational and proper decision. According to the appellants also there are only 231 applicants having CPEd qualification against 405 vacancies for the posts of PTI Gr. III.

8. Having heard the parties, we have also perused the written submissions filed on behalf of some of them and have perused the judgment of the learned Single Judge [Prakash Chand Meena v. State of Rajasthan, 2012 SCC OnLine Raj 1898] and the impugned judgment [Dinesh Kumar Panwar v. Suresh Chand, Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1181 of 2012, decided on 1-7-2013 (Raj), 2013 SCC OnLine Raj 3770] of the Division Bench. In our considered view, the issue noticed at the outset must be decided on the basis of settled law noticed by the learned Single Bench that recruitment process must be completed as per terms and conditions in the advertisement and as per Rules existing when the recruitment process began. In the present case, the Division Bench has gone to great lengths in examining the issue whether BPEd and DPEd qualifications are equivalent or superior to CPEd qualification but such exercise cannot help the cause of the respondents who had the option either to cancel the recruitment process if there existed good reasons for the same or to complete it as per terms of advertisement and as per Rules. They chose to continue with the recruitment process and hence they cannot be permitted to depart from the qualification laid down in the advertisement as well as in the Rules which were suitably amended only later in 2011. In such a situation, factual justifications cannot change the legal position

2015 LF (SC) 1063 5 AKS,J W.P.No.31375 & 31629 of 2018

that the respondents acted against law and against the terms of advertisement in treating such applicants successful for appointment to the post of PTI Gr. III who held other qualifications but not the qualification of CPEd. Such candidates had not even submitted separate OMR application form for appointment to the post of PTI Gr. III which was essential as per the terms of advertisement."

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further

contended that after issuance of Recruitment Notification, the

respondents cannot constitute an Expert Committee and disqualified

the petitioners for the post of School Assistant. Learned counsel has

further contended that a plain reading of the eligibility conditions as

set out in the notification would make it abundantly clear that the

petitioners are qualified as they have degree in the allied subjects.

Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petitions

considering the cases of the petitioners for appointment to the post of

School Assistant (Mathematics) by declaring that the petitioners

have qualified to the post of School Assistant (Mathematics) in terms

of notification of the respondents dt.21-10-2017.

9. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has

contended that the petitioners have studied Mathematics only for few

semesters in the B.Tech course and they are not qualified for the post

of School Assistant (Mathematics) and the cases of the petitioners

were referred to the Expert Committee. Based upon the report of the

Expert Committee only, the cases of the petitioners are not being

considered for the post of School Assistant (Mathematics). He has 6 AKS,J W.P.No.31375 & 31629 of 2018

relied upon the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this

Court in W.A.No.562 of 2019 dt.02-12-2021, wherein the Division

Bench of this Court has held that it is not for the Courts to declare a

particular degree as equivalent to another degree and contended that

the petitioners are not having requisite qualification as set out in the

notification. Therefore, there are no merits in the Writ Petitions and

they are accordingly liable to be dismissed.

10. Having regard to the rival submissions made by the

parties, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners are

having qualification in the allied subjects and a plain perusal of the

notification dt.21-10-2017 would make it abundantly clear that one

must possess graduation/post graduation degree in mathematics or its

allied subjects as given in the annexure-A and annexure-A of the

notification would clearly state that for the allied subject for

mathematics, one should have degree in 'Applied Mathematics',

'Mathematics and Computer Science' and 'Statistics'.

11. Admittedly, the petitioners are having B.Tech., in

Computer Science which is listed in the annexure as allied subject in

Mathematics. Therefore, the petitioners are eligible for consideration

of their cases for appointment to the post of School Assistant

(Mathematics) as per notification. Hence, the respondents are

directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for appointment to

the post of School Assistant (Mathematics), if the petitioners are

coming up within the zone of consideration.

7 AKS,J W.P.No.31375 & 31629 of 2018

12. With the aforementioned directions, both the Writ

Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

13. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,

shall stand closed.

______________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Date: 28-12-2021 kvr