Sunday, December 18, 2011

Revised Result of UPTET (Uttar Pradesh Teacher Eligibility Exam) with new Answer keys may publish soon for selection of Primary Teachers(PRT) in Basic Education Department, UP

Revised Result of UPTET (Uttar Pradesh Teacher Eligibility Exam) with new Answer keys may publish soon for selection of Primary Teachers(PRT) in Basic Education Department, UP
Thanks Naved for commenting- 
Important Points -

14. The Court is concerned with questions where instead of option earlier shown correct by the Board, they have changed their view and another option has been treated to be correct. What the Board has done is that all the candidates who have answered revised option, the Board has awarded marks to them and option declared earlier correct but now incorrect, the marks awarded in respect thereof have been deducted. To my mind this approach of the Board to some extent has done more injustice. The Teachers Eligibility Test is a qualifying test without which a candidate would not be eligible for appointment as Assistant Teacher in Primary School in view of Regulations framed by the National Council for Teachers Education (hereinafter referred to as "NCTE") in exercise of power under Section 23 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (in short "Act, 2009"). 15. The general candidates securing 60% and above marks and reserved category candidates securing 55% and more marks are to be declared successful. It is per se not a competitive test. Inclusion of one shall not necessarily result in exclusion of another. If a candidate has already been declared successful on the basis of answers to respective questions in which options have now have been altered by the Board, and, on the basis of awarding of such marks he has been declared successful it would be unjust to declare him unsuccessful now if due to deduction of marks of such questions, the total marks secured by him earlier become lower than the prescribed pass marks. In my view the revised opinion of the Board in respect of such questions should not affect the result of candidates who have already been declared successful and they should remain untouched.
27. So far as questions no. 2, 3, 28 of Booklet 'B' J.L.E. And 3, 17 and 21, Series 'B' S.L.E.(A) are concerned, as argued in writ petition no. 71399 of 2011, I find that these questions are in the subject of Pedagogy. As already said, if Experts and the examining body have decided and opined a particular option to be correct, unless that option is shown to be palpably incorrect, no interference is called for in judicial review. It is the decision of Experts in the subject which must be honoured unless it is shown to be totally perverse. Hence, I find no irregularity in these questions.
28. So far as other aspects are concerned, i.e., alleged mistakes committed in assessment of copies, duplicate roll number etc., I do not find it expedient and appropriate to make any intervention at this stage, since Sri Neeraj Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel has stated at the Bar that Board shall look into such grievances of candidates if appropriate application is submitted to the Board within a prescribed time as deemed proper by this Court, and the matter shall be examined and decided at the level of the Board.
29. In the facts and circumstances, in view of discussion made above, I dispose of these writ petitions with the following directions:
(I) Question No.121, Series 'B', J.L.E. contain all wrong options and, therefore, it shall be treated a wrong question. Consequently the marks in respect of Question no. 121, Series 'B', J.L.E. shall be allotted to all candidates who have appeared in the concerned test. This direction shall simultaneously apply to corresponding question in remaining Series namely, 'A', 'C' and 'D' in J.L.E.
(II) In respect of Question no.125, Series 'B' JLE, the candidates answering any of the options i.e., 'B' or 'C' shall be awarded marks. This direction shall simultaneously apply to corresponding question in remaining Series namely, 'A', 'C' and 'D' in J.L.E.
(III) In respect of Question No. 142, Series 'B' JLE, the candidates who have answered any of the options i.e., 'A' or 'D' shall be awarded marks. This direction shall simultaneously apply to corresponding question in remaining Series namely, 'A', 'C' and 'D' in J.L.E.
(IV) Revised opinion of the Board with respect to Questions shown in the charts in para 5 above (other than asterisk marked) shall not affect adversely the result of the candidates already declared successful merely for the reason of change of opinion of the Board vis a vis correct option.
(V) All the candidates who have attempted these questions and have answered by referring to one of the two options, namely, the one which was correct as per initial Model Key Answer or that which is now correct as per the revised opinion, the candidates in both the events shall be awarded marks and their result shall be prepared accordingly.
(VI)
The Board shall publish a notice at least in four newspapers of different languages having wide circulation at the State level informing all concerned that in case any candidate has any grievance regarding UPTET Examination, 2011, about assessment etc., he may register his complaint by submitting application along with process fee of Rs. 100/- per application (by cash or by demand draft) within 15 days from the date of publication in the newspapers
.
(VII) The Board shall entertain all applications of the candidates raising their grievance regarding assessment etc. and shall look into their grievance and take a decision thereon within a week from the date of receipt of such application. Such decision shall be communicated to the candidate concerned within a week thereafter either by placing information on internet or on mail address given by the candidate or by registered post.
(VIII) The candidates who are already declared successful, their result shall not be affected to their prejudice but in case in view of the directions give above regarding certain questions, if their marks are to be increased, the same shall be given due credit.
(IX) The
revised result as a consequence of compliance of above directions shall be uploaded on internet and shall be given due publicity at the earliest
.
(X) No costs.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
See complete details below -
 

See Allahabad Highcourt Judement -
****************************************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
(AFR)
ourt No. - 33

1. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 71563 of 2011

Petitioner :- Lalit Mohan Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,K.S. Kushwaha

Connected with

2. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 71399 of 2011

Petitioner :- Jai Prakash Pandey & Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- S.K. Shukla
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

3. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72823 of 2011

Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- B.R. Sharma,Arvind Kumar Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72606 of 2011

4. Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam & Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- H.K. Shukla
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Dwivedi

5.Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72350 of 2011

Petitioner :- Deependra Kumar
Respondent :- U.P. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Arvind Kumar Tewari
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,C.N. Tripathi.

6. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72750 of 2011

Petitioner :- Ranoo Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- K.M. Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

7. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72825 of 2011

Petitioner :- Rupali Gupta
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Ramesh Chandra Agrahari
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

8. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72557 of 2011
Petitioner :- Kiran Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Anil Kumar Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

9. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72555 of 2011

Petitioner :- Neelam Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Rajendra Prasad Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

10. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72554 of 2011

Petitioner :- Sarita Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Rajendra Prasad Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

11. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72561 of 2011

Petitioner :- Sandhya
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Om Prakash Yadav
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,J.N. Maurya

12. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 71580 of 2011

Petitioner :- Madhulika Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Jitendra Kumar

13. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72432 of 2011

Petitioner :- Chandan Shukla
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- D.P. Tripathi,M.K. Pandey
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,C.N. Tripathi

14. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72189 of 2011

Petitioner :- Prem Pal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,R.A. Akhtar

15. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72326 of 2011

Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar & Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- F.A. Ansari
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

16. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72400 of 2011

Petitioner :- Pardeshi Ram Kanojia & Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Abhishek Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,C.N. Tripathi

17. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 71406 of 2011

Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Smt. Pratima Singh,Agni Pal Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

18. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 71566 of 2011

Petitioner :- Vishwa Deepak Tripathi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Upendra Kumar Pandey
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.

19. Case :- WRIT - A No. - 72558 of 2011

Petitioner :- Neetu Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Rakesh Prasad,Mahendr Kumar
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,V.K. Kushwaha


Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

1. In this bunch of more than one and half dozen writ petitions aggrieved by test conducted by Secondary Education Board Allahabad, U.P. (hereinafter referred to as "the Board") termed as "U.P. Teachers Eligibility Test 2011", the petitioners have approached this Court by means of these writ petitions, assailing their failure on various grounds. Some broad issues are as under:
I. Several questions having multiple options were wrong in the sense that none of the options was correct answer to the concerned question.
II. Some of the questions were such where according to model answers subsequently disclosed by examining body, the option disclosed to be correct was actually incorrect. Instead some other answer was correct. Hence, the questions have been evaluated with wrong answers, following mistake committed in model key answers prepared by the Board.
III. The candidates were actually present and had appeared in the examination but were wrongly shown absent.
IV. More than one candidate were provided same roll number which has influenced their result.
V. Answer booklet of one series had been examined with model answer sheets of different series resulting in wrong evaluation/assessment of candidates' answer sheets.
2. There are certain minor individual complaints also with regard to assessment, declaration of result etc.
3. Considering volume of cases coming to this Court raising similar complaints some of which are referred above and magnitude of the test conducted by the Board, this Court found that it would be in the interest of public at large if these matters are disposed of at the earliest and in this view of the matter with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the Court permitted them to address Court on various aspects based on their averments contained in their respective writ petitions in general.
4. So far as the Board is concerned, learned Standing Counsel chose not to file counter affidavit and instead had the benefit of presence of Secretary of the Board with relevant information and assisted the Court expressing Board's anxiety also of expeditious disposal of the matter in such a manner so that grievances of the petitioners are attended in an effective and objective manner and all these matters may settle finally. Regarding individual dispute relating to minor mistakes in assessment of answer sheets it was suggested that the Board shall entertain complaints made by individual candidates specifically and after looking into record and examining threadbare, the candidates shall be informed of the consequences. In this context, the only anxiety expressed by the Board is that this indulgence cannot be allowed for an indefinite period and, therefore, the Court may provide any reasonable time within which candidates aggrieved if any, may approach the Board with their complaints which shall be attended by it. Sri Neeraj Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel, however, also informed the Court that the Board had already been receiving and attending complaints of candidates and had also examined the same in detail. He also informed that with regard to discrepancies in model key answers the complaints were attended by Board and they constituting a committee of experts who examined all the answer sheets threadbare and thereafter submitted their report. It has been explained by him that there were three sets of examinations namely;
(I) Junior Primary Level Examination (Class I to V) (hereinafter referred to "J.L.E."
(II) Senior Primary Level Examination (Class VI to VIII) (Science) (hereinafter referred to "S.L.E.(S)"
(III) Senior Primary Level Examination (Class VI to VIII) (Arts)(hereinafter referred to "J.L.E.(A)"
He said that in every set of these examinations, answer sheets of four series were circulated to examinees which are Series 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'D'. The total number of questions in one set were 150. Questions set up in all the series of one kind of examination are same but their order/arrangement in different Series is different. For example, in J.L.E. question no.6 in Series 'A' is question no. 26 in Series 'B', 1 in Series 'C' and 21 in Series 'D' and so on. He said that in J.L.E.'s question paper committee of experts' constituted by Board found that there are five questions in which option shown to be correct in the model key answerers was actually incorrect and instead thereof other options were correct. Similar mistake in respect to eight questions was found in S.L.E.(S) and seven questions in S.L.E. (A). Besides in S.L.E.(S) two questions were such for which none of the options was correct. In S.L.E.(A) there are three such questions in which none of the option was correct. Sri Upadhyay, therefore, submitted that acting upon the aforesaid report of Experts, the Board revised its result by assigning marks to such candidates who had answered correct option (revised) by treating model key answers of that question incorrect and deducting marks allotted earlier. So far as the questions where no option was found correct, in respect thereof, all the candidates have been awarded marks whether they attempted the answer or not and revised result as such has been declared.
5. Details of such questions, where answers, options have been varied or where all answers were incorrect in different Series are as under:
J.L.E. Series 'A' Series 'B' Series 'C' Series 'D'
Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer
6 D ,26 D ,1 D ,21 D ,109 B ,114 B ,99 B ,104 B ,141 A ,121 A ,146 A ,126 A ,144
B ,124 B ,149 B ,129 B ,145 B ,126 B ,150 B ,130 B ,
S.L.E.(S) Series 'A' Series 'B' Series 'C' Series 'D'
Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer
20 C ,7 B ,2 B ,10 C ,22 B ,10 D ,5 D ,27 B ,25 D ,15 C ,25 C ,30 D ,37 A ,36 B ,
31 B ,32 A ,51 B , 52 A ,57 A ,56 B , 69 C , 61 C , 76 C , 64 C ,86 C , 84 C , 89
C , 71 C ,97 B ,95 * ,92 B , 100 * , 140*  * , 130 * , 115 * , 105 * , 145* * , 147 B ,
150 * , 142 B .
S.L.E.(A) Series 'A' Series 'B' Series 'C'  Series 'D'
Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer Q.No. Answer
20 C , 7 B ,2 B ,10 C ,22 B ,10 D ,5 D ,27 B ,25 D ,15 C ,25 C ,30 D ,37 A ,36 B ,31 B ,
32 A ,51 B ,52 A ,57 A ,56 B ,69 C ,61 C ,76 C ,64 C ,86 C ,84 C ,89 C ,71 C ,126 *
93 * ,106 * ,98 * ,140 * ,130 * ,115 * ,105 * ,143 * ,131 * ,148 * ,111 *

(The asterisks show questions bearing all options in Key Answers incorrect)
6. Sri Ashok Khare , learned Senior Advocate, appearing in Writ Petition No. 71563 of 2011 contended that in L.J.E., answer sheet, Series 'B' there are three more questions namely, questions no. 21, 85 and 142 in regard whereto either of key answers are incorrect, or the correct answer as per model key answer is incorrect and instead a different answer is correct. These three questions and options given thereto in Series 'B' of J.L.E. are as under:

"Q.21 To maintain interest among students in class, a teacher should. (A) use the blackboard (B) discuss
(C) tell stories (D) ask questions.


Q. 85 Choose the word opposite in meaning to the given word:
ability
(A) feasibility (B) inability (C) disability (D) inability.
Q.142. Oceans cover most of the earth's surface. Which is approximately
(A) ¾
(B) !/2 (C) 1/4 (D) 2/3 egklkxj iqFoh iq"B ds vf/kdka'k txg vko`Rr fd;k gS tks gS yxHkx
(A) ¾ (B) !/2 (C) 1/4 (D) 2/3

(highlighted part shown correct answer as per Board)

7. He further submitted that question no. 121 has four options and all these options are incorrect. Similarly, with respect of question no.125 he contended that earlier the model key answer shows option 'C' as correct while as per report of experts committee, the Board has now switched to option 'B' but this is also incorrect option. Therefore, deduction of marks in respect of question no. 125 Series 'B' of such candidates who have opted for 'C' is incorrect.
8. In Writ Petition No. 71399 of 2011 Sri S.K. Shukla, Advocate, advancing his submission on behalf of three petitioners, Sri Jai Prakash Pandey, Sunita Pandey and Harshita Malviya, contended that in J.L.E. Series 'B' questions no. 2, 3 and 28 also have wrong answers in Model Key Answers and instead correct answers ought to be as suggested by petitioners. These three questions read as under:
Q.2. Dyslexia is associated with (A) mental disorder (B) mathematical disorder
(C) reading disorder (D) behavioural disorder.
Q.3. Education of children with special needs should be provided (A) along with other normal children
(B) by methods developed for special children in special schools
(C) in special school
(D) by special teachers in special schools.

Q. 28. You have been told to accommodate two mentally retarded children in your class. You will (A) refuse to accept them as your students
(B) tell the principal to accommodate them in another class exclusively for mentally retarded children
(C) learn techniques to teach such students
(D) none of these.
9. Similarly in regard to S.L.E.(A) Series 'B' he submitted that answers treated correct in model key answer in regard to questions no. 3, 17 and 21 are not correct. These questions read as under:
Q.3. In which of the following stages do children become active members of their jeer group? (A) Adolescenee (B) Adolthood
(C) Early childhood (D) Childhood.
Q. 17. Some students send a greeting card to you on Teacher's day. What will you do? You will (A) do nothing (B) say thanks to them
(C) ask them not to waste money (D) reciprocate the good wishes to them.
Q. 21. Authoritarian level teaching is (A) teacher centred (B) child centred
(C) headmaster centred (D) experience based.

10. In all the remaining matters, learned counsel for the petitioners did not make any individual submissions but adopted and followed what has been argued by learned Senior Advocate Sri Khare and others. Basically, their grievance is that individual errors in respect whereto they have raised their complaints, the Board should be asked to examine and take appropriate decision accordingly.
11. I propose to consider first the arguments with respect to certain questions which according to petitioners are totally wrong or options selected by Board is wrong and how it should be dealt with.
12. Before adverting to rival submissions, this Court has no hesitation in reiterating the well settled exposition of law that in academic matters expert's opinion should not be interfered lightly by a Court of law in judicial review and instead great weightage has to be attached to their opinion. There may be a situation where different experts express different opinions but in such matters, broadly, the stand of examining body should be accepted unless it is found to be palpably wrong and erroneous. It is own case of the Board that in J.L.E. five questions are such where options earlier treated correct by Board were in fact not so and instead another option was correct. Similar is the case in S.L.E.(S) with regard to eight questions and in S.L.E.(A) seven questions.
13. Besides, two questions in S.L.E.(S) and three questions in S.L.E.(A) are such where all the four options are incorrect. With regard to these two and three questions respectively, the Board has taken decision to award marks to all the candidates and for this stand of the Board, learned counsel for the petitioners did not find any objection, hence, so far as this aspect is concerned, it warrants no consideration by this Court.
14. The Court is concerned with questions where instead of option earlier shown correct by the Board, they have changed their view and another option has been treated to be correct. What the Board has done is that all the candidates who have answered revised option, the Board has awarded marks to them and option declared earlier correct but now incorrect, the marks awarded in respect thereof have been deducted. To my mind this approach of the Board to some extent has done more injustice. The Teachers Eligibility Test is a qualifying test without which a candidate would not be eligible for appointment as Assistant Teacher in Primary School in view of Regulations framed by the National Council for Teachers Education (hereinafter referred to as "NCTE") in exercise of power under Section 23 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (in short "Act, 2009").
15. The general candidates securing 60% and above marks and reserved category candidates securing 55% and more marks are to be declared successful. It is per se not a competitive test. Inclusion of one shall not necessarily result in exclusion of another. If a candidate has already been declared successful on the basis of answers to respective questions in which options have now have been altered by the Board, and, on the basis of awarding of such marks he has been declared successful it would be unjust to declare him unsuccessful now if due to deduction of marks of such questions, the total marks secured by him earlier become lower than the prescribed pass marks. In my view the revised opinion of the Board in respect of such questions should not affect the result of candidates who have already been declared successful and they should remain untouched. The process adopted by the Board is basically in the nature of corrective steps and if that be so, it ought no to have acted prejudicial to the candidates already declared successful merely on account of revised opinion with regard to options which were earlier treated correct.
16. Coming to the submission that in JLE there are some questions which are palpably incorrect or options determined by the Board to be correct is still incorrect. I proceed to examine whether it can be said that the Board's decision is ex facie incorrect and arbitrary or not.
17. Question no. 21, Series 'B' J.L.E. is, "what should a teacher do to maintain interest amongst the student in a Class". This question forms part of Section I relating to Pedagogy. The dictionary meaning of the word 'Pedagogy' is study of teaching methods. It basically involves knowledge and training, though scientific but philosophical in aspects. Experience of different persons in the field may have some variations. In these circumstances, general practice in such matter is to follow opinion which is widely accepted and the manner in which, most of the Experts treat correct. No mathematical precision can be found. By referring to one or two text books or individual opinion nothing can be said or argued. Unless shown ex facie improbable, the Courts must honour and respect opinion of Expert's and examining body since it is their field of expertise and, therefore, the same must be given due honour. This is a question based on experience and subjective opinion of Experts who may differ. The Board has provided option 'D' as the correct answer and it cannot be said that it is palpably erroneous or faulty. Where two views are possible the opinion of Experts on the subject and the examining body must be given due credit, respect and deserved preference. I, therefore, find no reason to accept submission of Sri Ashok Khare in regard to Question no. 21 Series 'B', J.L.E.
18. Question no. 85, Series B, J.L.E. asked opposite of 'Ability'. The Board finds correct option as 'D'. Sri Khare submitted that even 'disability' is correct answer. In this question, in fact, according to Sri Khare, there are two options which are correct i.e., 'disability' and 'inability'. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to rely on certain legal dictionaries' meanings in this regard. I find no force.
19. 'Disability' and 'inability' do not carry the same meaning though to some extent the consequences may be the same. The term 'disability' is defined in New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary of the English Language 1987 Edition at page 269 as under:
"Disability: a being physically or mentally disabled; a cause of this; a legal disqualification or incapacity ."

Similarly, 'inability' is also therein at page 488 as under:
"Inability: The state or quality of being unable"

20. In Oxford Advanced Learner's Dicitionary, 7th Edition 2005 defines 'Disability' at page 430 as under:
"Disability: A physical or mental condition that means you cannot use a part of your body completely or easily, or that you cannot learn easily"
21. It also defines 'ability' at page 2 and 'inability' at page 782 as under:
"Ability 1. (Singular)--to do something, the fact that somebody/something is able to do something. Opp: Inability. 2. a level of skill or intelligence"
"Inability (to do sth) the fact of not being able to do something;"

22. Terms or words as explained by Law Courts in the context of some statute etc. are not to be relied to create confusion that there may be some other answers also. I, therefore, find no palpable error on the part of the Board in treating option 'D; in question no. 85 Series 'B', J.L.E. to be correct answer. The argument raised otherwise is rejected.
23. Question no. 121, Series 'B' , J.L.E. really poses a serious problem. It asks about an International Organization which looks after "environmental protection all over the world". The options of question no. 121 are: (A) WWF (B) WHO (C) PETA (D) UN. The Board has treated option 'A' i.e., WWF (World Wildlife Fund) as the correct answer. I have serious doubt about this. Rest two options namely, 'B' and 'C' admittedly have no connection with the environment. The basic object and mission of WWF is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. It deals with protection of wildlife throughout the world and is not concerned mainly with environment though forest may constitute a part of environment. To any person of common prudence, the question is apparently difficult to answer from the options given thereunder. It is true that out of four options, 'A' would have gone nearest to the answer, but it cannot be said to be totally correct answer as such. United Nations Environment Programme is an organization of United Nations dealing with environment and its development. However, since out of four options, two options namely, WHO and PETA are clearly and palpably inapplicable, and WWF, to some extent is concerned with nature which includes environment, the candidates by process of elimination could have rejected other except 'A'. Looking from this angle, determination of option 'A' correct by itself may not be palpably wrong and incorrect. This could have led me in refraining from interfering with the decision taken by Board by treating option 'A' correct provided this decision would have been taken initially by the Board also. The Board has however, admitted that in the model key answers it has treated another answer correct which it has not disclosed. The same has now been changed after report of Experts' committee to Option 'A' meaning thereby options were so confusing and vague that earlier even examining committee, who set the paper also committed a mistake. This shows that question and answers are so vague that even experts failed to find out correct option at one point of time. In such a case, no candidate should be made to suffer. Hence in my view this question should be treated to be a wrong question having no correct answer. Therefore, marks in respect of question no. 121, Series 'B' J.L.E. shall be allotted to all the candidates treating this question wrong in its entirety. This direction shall simultaneously apply to the corresponding questions in remaining series namely, A, C and D in J.L.E.
24. Now I come to Question No. 125 Series 'B' J.L.E. It talks of most popular species of sea turtles found in the Waters of Indian sub continent. According to Board's own stand, earlier it has treated some other option correct but by virtue of revised option pursuant to experts committee report has switched over to option 'B', Series 'B' i.e., 'Loggerhead'. According to petitioners the correct answer is option 'C' i.e., "Olive Ridley". In support of their submission, petitioners have placed reliance on certain information downloaded from internet. At page 99 one of the downloaded information placed by petitioner before this Court says, "Olive Ridley Turtle" is considered a most abundant Sea Turtle in the world with an estimated 800,000 nesting female annually. About the "Loggerhead Sea Turtle" at page 104 it reads as under: "Habitat: Prefer to feed in coastal bays and estuaries, as well as in the shallow water along the continental shelves of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans." 25. The Board's Experts initially did not choose 'Loggerhead' as the correct option but it has been taken in the revised opinion. About 'habitat' of "Olive Ridley", page 100 of writ petition no. 71563 of 2011 shows that it is globally distributed in tropical regions of South Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. At page 100 about "Olive Ridley" it further says "In the Northern Indian Ocean, arribadas occur on three different beaches along the coast of India". Exact population of both these categories of turtles in waters of Indian Sub-continent is not mentioned but at page 101 in writ petition no. 71563 of 2011 published record says that in 1970s numerous Olive Ridley deaths were reported in Eastern Indian Ocean. The question ex facie appears to be quite confusing and vague inasmuch as, it contains two options over which the readers can lay their claim that both may constitute correct answer. Here examinees are not expert Scientists or environmentalists or in that way, Scientists in Flora and Fauna. These candidates are aspiring to become Assistant Teacher in Primary School, i.e., the first stage of education. Extraordinary scientific information with extensive details cannot be accepted from these persons. The questions ought to have been set in these examinations commensurating to the standard of the candidates who are expected to appear in the concerned test. In that context the question appears to be quite confusing, vague, having multiple correct answers. However, these is no dispute in this matter that rest of the two options given in Question no. 125 are apparently wrong. It is this situation which refrained me from declaring this entire question, incorrect. In the circumstances, in my view, both the options 'B' and 'C' ought to be treated correct and candidate who have answered either of the two should be given due credit and awarded marks. I answer accordingly.
26. Question no. 142, Series 'B', J.L.E. Again poses a more serious problem. It asks the "extent of coverage of earth surface approximately by oceans". It does not talk of mere 'water' but is confined to 'oceans'. The coverage by Ocean is lesser than water as a whole. The Court is informed that the Board treated option 'A' as correct answer. Learned counsel for petitioner tried to show that actual area covered by oceans comes to about 70.8 per cent which is a mid way figure between 2/3 and 3/4 , i. e. 66.6 per cent and 75 per cent. These figures could not be disputed by the respondents. Hence, in my view, the Board in this question should treat option 'D' also correct and candidates who have answered either of options i.e. 'A' and 'D' in series 'B', Question 142 in J.L.E. should be awarded marks.
27. So far as questions no. 2, 3, 28 of Booklet 'B' J.L.E. And 3, 17 and 21, Series 'B' S.L.E.(A) are concerned, as argued in writ petition no. 71399 of 2011, I find that these questions are in the subject of Pedagogy. As already said, if Experts and the examining body have decided and opined a particular option to be correct, unless that option is shown to be palpably incorrect, no interference is called for in judicial review. It is the decision of Experts in the subject which must be honoured unless it is shown to be totally perverse. Hence, I find no irregularity in these questions.
28. So far as other aspects are concerned, i.e., alleged mistakes committed in assessment of copies, duplicate roll number etc., I do not find it expedient and appropriate to make any intervention at this stage, since Sri Neeraj Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel has stated at the Bar that Board shall look into such grievances of candidates if appropriate application is submitted to the Board within a prescribed time as deemed proper by this Court, and the matter shall be examined and decided at the level of the Board.
29. In the facts and circumstances, in view of discussion made above, I dispose of these writ petitions with the following directions:
(I) Question No.121, Series 'B', J.L.E. contain all wrong options and, therefore, it shall be treated a wrong question. Consequently the marks in respect of Question no. 121, Series 'B', J.L.E. shall be allotted to all candidates who have appeared in the concerned test. This direction shall simultaneously apply to corresponding question in remaining Series namely, 'A', 'C' and 'D' in J.L.E.
(II) In respect of Question no.125, Series 'B' JLE, the candidates answering any of the options i.e., 'B' or 'C' shall be awarded marks. This direction shall simultaneously apply to corresponding question in remaining Series namely, 'A', 'C' and 'D' in J.L.E.
(III) In respect of Question No. 142, Series 'B' JLE, the candidates who have answered any of the options i.e., 'A' or 'D' shall be awarded marks. This direction shall simultaneously apply to corresponding question in remaining Series namely, 'A', 'C' and 'D' in J.L.E.
(IV) Revised opinion of the Board with respect to Questions shown in the charts in para 5 above (other than asterisk marked) shall not affect adversely the result of the candidates already declared successful merely for the reason of change of opinion of the Board vis a vis correct option.
(V) All the candidates who have attempted these questions and have answered by referring to one of the two options, namely, the one which was correct as per initial Model Key Answer or that which is now correct as per the revised opinion, the candidates in both the events shall be awarded marks and their result shall be prepared accordingly.
(VI) The Board shall publish a notice at least in four newspapers of different languages having wide circulation at the State level informing all concerned that in case any candidate has any grievance regarding UPTET Examination, 2011, about assessment etc., he may register his complaint by submitting application along with process fee of Rs. 100/- per application (by cash or by demand draft) within 15 days from the date of publication in the newspapers.
(VII) The Board shall entertain all applications of the candidates raising their grievance regarding assessment etc. and shall look into their grievance and take a decision thereon within a week from the date of receipt of such application. Such decision shall be communicated to the candidate concerned within a week thereafter either by placing information on internet or on mail address given by the candidate or by registered post.
(VIII) The candidates who are already declared successful, their result shall not be affected to their prejudice but in case in view of the directions give above regarding certain questions, if their marks are to be increased, the same shall be given due credit.
(IX) The revised result as a consequence of compliance of above directions shall be uploaded on internet and shall be given due publicity at the earliest.
(X) No costs.
Dated: 16.12.2011
Akn.

41 comments:

Friend said...

Jab tak court ka final decision nahin aa jata,tab tak Vigyapti shayad nahin publish hogi.
Intjaar bekar hai.
Phir bhi aap log latest news padte rahin, Bhrti Ho Bhi Sakti hai/Joining letter 6-7 dinon mein mil bha sakta hai/ OR nahin bhi.
Highcourt ke final aadesh ka intjaar karen.

Anonymous said...

sabhi tet pass candidate dhyan dain
kya antar hai sabhi jagah form dalne ke option main aur state level par uptet pass ke form bhare bina counseling karane main.

1. state level par counseling karne par koi form dalne ke aavasyakta nahi hai.
jabki ab sabhi ko 1 se lekar 30-35 tak form dalne pad rahein hain.

2. state level par yadi form hi nahi bharvaya jaye to time nahi lagega aur tet result correct hone ke bad sidhe counseling ki prakriya suru ho sakti hai.

jabki ab 1 candidate ka form dalne ka average 15 tak ja sakta hai aur 15 form matlab 15*270806= 406290 form sabhi diet ka total. form ko alag kar feed karne main lagne wala samya 15 din se jyada.

3 state level par sirf ek draft banakar lao aur counseling ke time par jis district main join karna hai jama kar do.

jabki ab draft ke photo copy lagakar sabhi jagah alag alag avedan karna.

4. state level par counseling karne se samya nahi lagega galti ki sambhavana bahoot hi kam.
jabki abhi samya to lagega hi sath hi kisi bhi kimat pat mistake kiye bina bharti prakriya nahi ho payegi.

5. state level par counseling se paisa, main power, time,ki bachat.

jabki is prakriya main candidate se laker, bank, daak vibhag, DIETs, SELECTORS, SARKAR, sabhi ko proboms.

6. State level Counseling se NCTE ki jo DEAD LINE 1 JAN 2012 di hai usse pahle bharti prakriya poorn ho jayegi.

jabki is prakriya se kisi bhi halat main ye bharti time par nahi ho payegi.

7. sarkar ko koi nayi vigayapti main dimag lagane ki jaroorat nahi.

8. state level par 1 counseling process main hi bharti prakriya poori ho jayegi.

jabki vartmaan prakriya se kam se kam 8 se 10 bar marit banani pad sakti hai.

9. state level par ek hi baar aur ek hi jagah par counseling main jana padega

jabki is prakriya main ek candidate ko ek din ya do din main 5 se 10 jagah counseling ke liye bulaya ja sakta hai.

total harasment hai is prakriya main
so bina form sidhe state level par tet pass candidate ko counseling ke liye bulao
bina tension bharti karo.

7597947237

Muskan said...

UPTET - totally confusion :-Highcourt ka order to TET result ko sansodhit karne ko kehta hai.
Doosri taraf nayee Vigyapti bhi jaree honee hai.
Time is very less. Ending in Gr8 SUSPENSE.

prakash said...

ye vigyapti kab aayegi new draft banwaye ya purane se hi kaam chalega. Pata nahi purane se kaun sa wapas aayega.

Anonymous said...

PRAKASH JI AAP KA KITNA SCORE HAI?

din said...

vigyapti jaldi hi ayaegi it has to be clarified from diff departments,so there is delay but i believe recruitment hoga.ho sakta hai ki state level counselling ho kyonki koi or tarika bhi nahin hai 31 tak bharti ka.

prakash said...

sir ji my score is 108. Gen male science. Kya aap kuch bata sakte ho. Kya chance hai.

Anonymous said...

Dont worry friend ab govt.chah kar bhi tet merit par selection nahi kar sakti hai...kal ke highcourt ke decision ka kalam 14 aur 15 padhiye.jo isi site par diya gaya hai

Anonymous said...

what do u mean by dont worry ?
phir wahi hoga ghoda ghaas khayga aur gadhe chyavanprash??

raj kapoor
hathras

Anonymous said...

Bhai mere kahne ka matlab hai ki ab merit ko lekar discussion band karo aur socho aage kya hoga

Anonymous said...

GOOD NEWS (BAD NEWS FOR ALL TUKEEBAJ)

ab govt.chah kar bhi tet merit par selection nahi kar sakti hai .Kal date 17.12.11 highcourt judgement padhiye

The Court is concerned with questions where instead of option
earlier shown correct by the Board, they have changed their view and
another option has been treatedto be correct. What the Board has
done is that all the candidates who have answered revised option, the
Board has awarded marks to them and option declared earliercorrect
but now incorrect, the marks awarded in respect thereof havebeen
deducted. To my mind this approach of the Board to some extent has
done more injustice. The Teachers Eligibility Test is a qualifying test
without which a candidate would not be eligible for appointment as
Assistant Teacher in Primary School in view of Regulations framed by
the National Council for TeachersEducation (hereinafter referred to
as “NCTE”) in exercise of power under Section 23 of Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (in short “Act,
2009”).
15. The general candidates securing 60% and above marks and
reserved category candidates securing 55% and more marks are to be
declared successful. It is per se not a competitive test. Inclusion of
one shall not necessarily result inexclusion of another. If a candidate
has already been declared successful on the basis of answers to
respective questions in which options have now have been altered by
the Board, and, on the basis of awarding of such marks he has been
declared successful it would be unjust to declare him unsuccessful
now if due to deduction of marks of such questions, the total marks
secured by him earlier become lower than the prescribed pass marks.
In my view the revised opinion of the Board in respect of such
questions should not affect the result of candidates who have already
been declared successful and they should remain untouched. The
process adopted by the Board is basically in the nature of corrective
steps and if that be so, it ought no to have acted prejudicial to the
candidates already declared successful merely on account of revised
opinion with regard to options which were earlier treated correct

Anonymous said...

Don't worry candidates, Court say only - "Some Extent".
Additionally if somebody can't select based on TET , it is not specified in NCTE notification.
therefore bypassing earlier decision is not easily possible as it is playing with the life of so many candidates.
Some candidates who obtained less marks are creating problems.
In Rajathan also 20% TET marks are going to be added, why it is?

Keep hope, Don't worry.

Anonymous said...

Highcourt tet ko comptetive exam nahi manti aur isi base par wo u.p.board ko order deti hai ki 15 din ke bhitar sabhi complain ko solve kare,kyoki kisi aur ke pas ho jane ya number badh jane se kisi aur ka nuksan nahi hoga
par u.p.govt. Ne to tet ko comptetive exam hi bana diya hai kyoki wo isi ke base par job de rahi hai,yani ki kisi aur ke pas hone ya number badhne se kaio ko nuksan hoga

to kya u.p.govt ko highcourt ke decision ki jankari nahi hai jo tet merit par selection kar rahi hai

Anonymous said...

Highcourt tet ko comptetive exam nahi manti kewal qualifying exam manti hai aur isi base par wo u.p.board ko order deti hai ki 15 din ke bhitar sabhi complain ko solve kare,kyoki kisi aur ke pas ho jane ya number badh jane se anya kisi ka nuksan nahi hoga
par u.p.govt. ne to tet ko comptetive exam hi bana diya hai kyoki wo isi ke base par job de rahi hai,yani ki kisi aur ke pas hone ya number badhne se kaio ko nuksan hoga

to kya u.p.govt ko highcourt ke decision ki jankari nahi hai jo tet merit par selection kar rahi hai
friends agar u.p.govt.tet ke base par selection karti hai to selection 31dec.tak nahi ho payega kyoki court ne bhi mana hai ki "some extent"yani kuch had tak u.p.board se gadbadiya hui hai
aur govt.ise comptetive exam ki tarah nahi le sakta

sanjeev said...

phir ko koi bhi prakriya fare nahi, kaise aap academic record ko selection ka aadhar manoge? kya up bosrd waale cbse and icse board ki barabari kar sakte hai n kaun nahin jaanta ki board ke exams me dhandhli nahi hoti. toh nakal se pass hue student eligible hai selection ke kya aisa kahna hai court ka, kya court andhi hai.

Krishna said...

APPEAL-
SABHI TET QUALIFIED BHAIYO SE APPEAL HAI KI YE HIGH COURT AUR GOVT. HAMKO TEACHER NAHI BANNE DENGE,SAALE KOI NA KOI TAANG NIKALTE HI RAHTE HAIN.AB HAM INKE KHILAF SUPREME COURT JAYENGE.BE READY TO GO SUPREME COURT.....BE IN TOUCH N KEEP IN TOUCH EVERYBODY......
MY CONTACT NO. 9045832527
NAUKRI CHAHIYE TO CHALO SUPREME COURT...

Anonymous said...

the order of court is totaly right.this will be wrong to take only tet merit for recruitment because it was only an eligibility critariya.
can anyone may explain why merits other than tet should not be added for recryitment.
the exreme point may be that some % of tet merit should also be added in total merit and nothing else.

Anonymous said...

the order of court is totaly right.this will be wrong to take only tet merit for recruitment because it was only an eligibility critariya.
can anyone may explain why merits other than tet should not be added for recryitment.
the exreme point may be that some % of tet merit should also be added in total merit and nothing else.

Anonymous said...

yes now a days recruitment is not based only on a single exame based.it should also be know about ather skills othet than educational.
and those skills may be may be known by some extant by analysing ones total educational qualificatoin.

Anonymous said...

Hi Krishna Bhai, kis judgement ke khilaf Supreme Court jaoge, High Court ka judgement to perfect hai, fir aap ka grievance kahan hai

Anonymous said...

Friends ye court ka order u.p.board ke liye hai na ki u.p.basic education board ke liye
so dont worry jab tak koi student is order ko base banakar recruitment ko challenge nahi karta hai tab tak kuch nahi hoga...
Aur kal ke bad court band ho jayega 31dec.tak tab tak to hamare hatho me joining letter hoga

Anonymous said...

Friends ye court ka order u.p.board ke liye hai na ki u.p.basic education board ke liye
so dont worry jab tak koi student is order ko base banakar recruitment ko challenge nahi karta hai tab tak kuch nahi hoga...
Aur kal ke bad court band ho jayega 31dec.tak tab tak to hamare hatho me joining letter hoga

Krishna said...

High school,inter,graduation,aur b.ed. Mein curruption ke dam par achchhi percentage banwane wale aur tet mein failed or only passing marks lane wale sabhi sammanit candidates ko main bata dena chahunga ki kitni bhi writ file kar lo,kuchh bhi kar lo,TET QUALIFIED TEACHER BANKAR HI RAHENGE,''SATYAMEV JAYATE''
JO YOGYA HAIN VE TEACHER BANNE HI CHAHIYE,EK SAKSHAR AUR VIKSIT BHARAT DESH KE LIYE YE PARAM AAVASHYAK HAI KI USKE SUNAHRE BHAVISHYA KI AADHAR SHILA YOGYA VYAKTIYO DVARA HI RAKHI JAYE.AYOGYA AUR CURRUPT LOGO DVARA NAHI.TABHI DESH UNNATI KAR SAKTA HAI.
HAR CHEEZ KI EK SEEMA HOTI HAI USI TARAH CURRUPTION KI BHI EK SEEMA HAI.YAH BHI EK LEVEL TAK HI CHALTA HAI.AGAR HIGH COURT KOI CURRUPT DECISION DETA HAI TO SUPREME COURT HAI.
AAO HAM SABHI PRATIGYA KAREN KI HAM APNA ADHIKAR PRAPT KARKE RAHENGE......

Anonymous said...

Yadi academic merit ke bahut wakalat karne wale, Jab IAS ka exam hota hai usme kyon court nahi jate waha bhi kaho ki IAS/Engennier/Medical main be Academic merit ho. Yadi tumahara academic record mehnat ka hain to etney easy TET exam main kya ho gaya. Iska matlab hai jinka Academic record 80% to 90% hai aur TET main ghus gaye hain wo sab nakalchi hain. Here i am giving two fact. Jinke TET main achhe nuber hai unaka academic record bhi sure achha hoga(May be little bit less from nakalchi student). But jinke Academic main achha record hai nakalchi student wo TET main jaroor fail huye hain. Manneya highcourt bhi is baat ko jaroor dhyan rakhega aur Corrupt/Nakalchi student condidate ka sath nahi dega. So dosto don't worry.

ashwani said...

mai sart lagake kah skta hun k vigyaptinahi aayegi

ashwani said...

sab gvt.ki chaal hain kuch b nahi hoga

Krishna said...

Agar 31 december tak koi prt teacher nahi ban paya to vah fir kabhi nahi ban sakega.ham tet ke aaadhar par hi merit ki maang kar rahe hain kyuki ham jante hain ki agar academic ke chakkar mein pade to kuchh nahi milega.aur jab academic mein aapke hoshiyari se hi numbers aaye hain to aapki hoshiyari tet mein kaha chali gayi?ab bawal khada kar rahe ho..nakal se academic banwa li aur chal diye teacher banne.ab tet aa gaya to mirchi lag rahi hain kyuki tet mein daal nahi gali.
Intelligent kabhi nahi rukta aur kahin nahi rukta ye baat yaad rakhna.aur ab to YE VACANCIES AGAR POORI HONGI TO SIRF TET KE AADHAR PAR NAHI TO SUPREME COURT ZINDABAD.SABHI BHAIYO SUPREME COURT CHALNE KO TAIYAR RAHE.
thanks to all my dear friends

kash_indian said...

kya zarurat thi high court jane ki... ye whi log gae h jo ya to jugad se B.Ed 70%+ wale h aur ab tet ya to qualify nhi kr pae ya fir marks kam pae h isi lie mr rhe h.....kitne log salo se is vacancy ka intezar kr rhe h.... kitno ke spne, kitno ki ummiden judi hui h is se..aur to aur kitno ki shadi nhi hui isi wajah se abhi tak.... lekin inko kya...bas chale gae hc apne faede ke lie... agar is bar ye selection na hua to pta nhi... lakhon logo ka kya hoga.. bechare kis jaddojahad se phle B.Ed aur ab tet kia... bt kuch logo ki wajah se sb ko bhugatna pdega... agr ye vacancy cancel in logo (jo hc gae h) ki wajah se cancel hui...to kasam se in logo ka bhut bura hasr hoga....aur lakhon logo ki badduaen lgegi inko.... kashif

kash_indian said...

krishna bhai.....i m with u...... kashif

spal singh said...

HELLO FRIENDS,TAANG ADANE WALE KHOOB TAANG ADAYENGE LEKIN SARKAR YADI CHAHTI HA KI BHARTI HO TO HOKAR RAHEGI,TET MEIN KUM NUMBER PANE WALE HALLA MACHA RAHE HAIN.

Anonymous said...

Dear pandey ji mujhe dislexia nahi huaa tha aur na hi mere academic mein kam markas hain.i m throughout first class student nd i've more than 66% marks overall.
Lekin main ye chahta hu ki ye process poora ho,kyuki jo kuchh hona hai 31st december tak hi ho sakta hai.to bekar ki taang adaane se kya mil raha hai?kuchh log vaise hi maje le rahe hain.kya kar logo ki niyuktiyo ko radd karwa ke?na khaoge hi na khane doge..
Hamara aashay sirf itna hai ki ye niyuktiya honi hi chahiye.aur iske liye ham supreme court tak jayenge.

Muskan said...

We will remove all abusive comments, And therefore think your language for writing.
there are many good words/writing skills, which you can use/express for your anger.
Thanks.

Krishna said...

Thanks kashif bhai,we'll win finally...
All the best

Unknown said...

Aap sabhi itni bahas kyo kar rhe ho,tet ki hi merit se selection hoga kyunki sarkar ne teacher nyukti niyamabali me aisa hi mention kiya hai.academic tabhi ho sakti hai jab dubara niyamabali me sansodhan ho.

kash_indian said...

yes muskan ji...there are some other ways to express ur anger..so frnds hav patience ... and friends kam se kam ye socho ki 31 tak agar ye complete na hua to lakhon logo ka kya hoga ? kam se kam jo log tet qualify kr lie h unko to job pa jane do ... yaha to ye haal lag rha h ki.. " na khud khaenge aur naa kisi dusre ko khane denge "... kuch to sharm kro yar.... and krishna bhai....thanx and all the best to u also... kashif

vinay said...

ab kuch nahi hona hai... Chunav ki adhisuchana jari hogi.. Sab khatm

vinay said...

kya yar sab gayab ho gaye..... Vigyapti aa gai kya.....? hahahaha

Kaatil Jatt said...

New Advt. Mein Chayan Prakriya Ke Bare Me Kuch Saaf Nahi Kiya Gaya Hai. Usme Ek Letter DIET Ko Bhejne Ki Baat Kahi Gayi Hai Jisme 19.12.2011 Ke G.O. Ke Bare Me Kaha Gaya Hai, Jo Doubt Paida Karti Hai Ki Kahin Govt. Process Change Karne To Nahi Ja Rahi. Plz Aap Log Apne Near Ke DIET Se Chayan Process Ke Us Letter Ke Vishay Me Confirm Kare. Kahi Aisa Na Ho Ki Chayan Ka Aadhar Badal Diya Gaya Ho Aur Hume Bataya Bhi Na Gaya Ho. Yadi Aadhar Purana Hi Hota To Naye G.O. Ki Kya Zarurat Thi.

Anonymous said...

lo bhaiyon ek baar phir lag gayi bharti par rok...iss baar varanasi k ek janab hai ,jinko iss baat ki aappati hai ki ye advertizement basic siksha secretary ne nikalya hai..jo ki NCTE ke advt rule 14 k anusaar galat hai..iss advertize ko kewal basic siksha adhikari hi nikaal sakta hai..court ne 11 jan tak jawab manga hai..kul milakar philhaal to rok lag gayi hai...

bhaiyiyon muzhe to lagta hai ki ab ye selection rajneeti ka bhi shikaar ho gayi gayi hai..nahi to acchi bhali chal rahi prakriya ko baar-2 rukwana ko aam aadmi kyu karega..aajkal kisi k pass itna samay nahi..haan ye jaroor ho sakta hai ki iss selection se sarkar ko votes ka fark jaroor padega..baaki aap log samazdaar hai..jisne iss baar yachika daali hai, uski details dekhiye, khud hi samazh mein aajayega...

Anonymous said...

ye nakalchi log to to jine nahi denge yaaro...ye yahan bhi apni hasrat puri karna chahte hain..ab tak to nakal se pass hote aaye hain ..aur ab bechare reh gaye issliye pareshaan hain bechare...pet mein dard ho raha jab naukrio jaati hui dikh rahi hai...mein to thanks kahunga apni sarkar ko ki usse maalom hai ki SP govt mein kuch khaas belt k log farji tarikon se highest number gain karte hai..inhone to kisi bhi exam ko mazak bana kar rakha hai...aur ab naukri bhi mazak mein hi chahiye...had ho gayi...sharam bhi nahi khud par inhe...sharam karo aur compitition fight karo nalayyako

raju said...

bhaiyon ab to shak ho raha hai iss selection par...pata nahi ye ho payega bhi nahi...sarkar to puri koshish kar rahi hai..lekin kuch na-murad log hai ki wo kuch accha hone nahi hone dena chahte..unka to bus ek hi mat hai ki na accha kiya hai na karne denge..sakar ki mansha pa shak issliye nahi kiya ja sakta kyuki unhone court k har aadesh ko puri tarh nibhaya hai..phir bhi kuch log(tet failures aur nakalchi log)koi na adanga lagate hi rehte hai...unhe ye nahi maloom ki agar ye selection kisi bhi wajah se ruka to tet qualified log bhi chup nahi baithne wale..