UPTET 2013 : Allahabad High Court Decision Regarding Appearing B.Ed / BTC candidates, Suggesting State Govt. to Give them chance to appear in UPTET 2013 if NCTE rules approve it
UPTET - Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Recruitment News
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 26660 of 2013
Petitioner :- Rambabu Vishwakarma And 5 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Apurva Hajela,Ajit Kumar Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Yatindra
������������������������ With
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25766 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ghyan Sagar Mani Tripathi And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 2 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Vinod Kumar Singh,Pradeep Singh Sengar
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
������������������������ With
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 26301 of 2013
Petitioner :- Prashant Sharma And 22 Others
Respondent :- State And 7 Others
Petitioner Counsel :- R.J. Shahi,C.V.S. Raghuvansi
Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C.,P.P. Yadav,R.A. Akhtar
����������������������� With
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 26262 of 2013
Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Mukul Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,R.A.Akhtar
������������������������ With
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25670 of 2013
Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Singh And 6 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Shailesh Kumar Shukla
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Rizwan Ali Akhtar
������������������������ With
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 26468 of 2013
Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar And 3 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Ram Swarup Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
All the petitioners herein raise a common plea that they have finally either appeared in the qualifying examination of training teachers education course or are about to appear and their results are shortly to be declared. They are being prevented from appearing in the Teacher Eligibility Test on account of the condition imposed that the application forms of only such candidates shall be accepted who have already passed out their training qualification or have acquired the alternative qualification like B.Ed.�
The contention of all the learned counsel appearing in these cases is to the effect that in the previous year also when the Teacher Eligibility Test was being held in 2011, such a relaxation was provided by the State Government itself allowing those, who were about to complete their training course or whose results had not been declared, to appear in the Teacher Eligibility Test. They, therefore, submit that there is no new situation for holding of the examinations and, therefore, the petitioners should be permitted to appear in the Teacher Eligibility Test.
Learned counsel's argument is that the Teacher Eligibility Test is a separate requirement which can be gained by any candidate and is not concerned with the� other minimum educational qualification. Thus, a candidate can acquire the training qualification by the time the Teacher Eligibility Test is held. The passing of the TET will not automatically give them a chance for seeking appointment as an Assistant Teacher unless they complete the training qualification. Thus, they can be allowed to appear in the Teacher Eligibility Test which is to be held at least once in a year according to the policy laid down by the National Council for Teacher Education but is generally delayed.
The second limb of argument, which has been� forcefully canvassed, is that this prayer is in accordance with the Eligibility Clause No. 5(ii) which is as follows:-
"5 (ii) A person who is pursuing any of the teacher education courses (recognized by the NCTE or the RCI, as the case may be specified in the NCTE Notification dated 23rd August 2010."
The petitioners, therefore, contend that these guidelines that have been introduced on 11.2.2011 bind the respondent-State Government to allow such candidates who are pursuing any teacher education course, also to appear in the T.E.T. Examination. All the petitioners are also pursuing their teacher education course and, in such circumstances, the said guidelines should also be followed by the State Government.
Sri Upendra Singh had been called upon to obtain instructions in this matter and he contends that, according to the Government Order dated 17.4.2013, under which the T.E.T. Examinations are going to be held, it has been provided that only such candidates can apply who have passed out their B.T.C. training course or otherwise have acquired any other such prescribed qualification. Some instructions in writing have been forwarded by the Examination Regulatory Authority Smt. Neena Srivastava.�
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the contention appears to be that the N.C.T.E. guidelines are binding on the respondent State. This aspect of the matter does not appear to have been considered in the communication, which has been sent by the Examination Regulatory Authority.
The T.E.T. is only a qualifying examination as per the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 as amended up to date by the State Government. It may, therefore, not be necessary for preparation of inter se merit of candidates seeking appointment. Thus, allowing such candidates to appear in T.E.T would not prejudice any candidate. Secondly, it would save the time of a candidate seeking to acquire such qualification, without compelling him to wait for six months or one year to appear in the same, even if he is to shortly acquire his other qualifications. Thirdly the guidelines issued under Section 35 of 2009 Act have to be observed as they, in no way, are in conflict with, any other provision.
The words "pursuing any of the teacher education course" occurring in the guidelines of the N.C.T.E. have been pointed out by Sri R.A. Akhtar, learned counsel for the N.C.T.E. To my mind, the same reflects the extension of such a facility to those candidates who have appeared in the final exams of their teacher education course or whose results are awaited at the final stage. This may not be for those who have just taken admission in a teacher education course/training course requiring completion in a year or two. This facility, like in the case of engineering or medical entrance test, where the candidate has already appeared in his 10+2 exams and is awaiting results, and is also eligible to appear in the entrance test is, therefore, to help such candidates who are to finally wrap up their teacher education course.
Thus, the respondents are not to loose anything or prejudice any cause. To the contrary, this would be a correct way of implementing the guidelines of the N.C.T.E.
Accordingly, a certified copy of this order shall be placed by the learned Standing Counsel before the State Government namely Principal Secretary (Basic Education) who shall forthwith convene a meeting in this respect and take notice of the said Eligibility conditions prescribed in the guidelines of the N.C.T.E. And issue an appropriate instruction or Government Order in the event it is found that the petitioners are also entitled to appear in the examinations according to the above mentioned guidelines by extending the date for filling up of the application forms accordingly.
A certified copy of this order shall be provided within 24 hours� to the learned Chief Standing Counsel for being communicated to the said authority for taking appropriate steps within a week.
All the petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
Date:-13.5.2013
Ram Murti�
Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2576836
**************************************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25670 of 2013
Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Singh And 6 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Shailesh Kumar Shukla
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Rizwan Ali Akhtar
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Disposed of.�
For order see my detailed order of the date passed in Writ-A No. 26660 of 2013 on the separate sheets.
Order Date :- 13.5.2013
Ram Murti
*************************************************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25670 of 2013
Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Singh And 6 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.& 3 Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Shailesh Kumar Shukla
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Rizwan Ali Akhtar
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
The petitioners claim that they have undergone B.T.C. Training Course but their exams have not concluded nor they have been issued certificates.
Even such category of persons are entitled to appear in the U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test. For this reliance is placed on Clause 4 of the guidelines issued under the letter dated 11th February, 2011 by the National Council for Teacher Education.
Learned counsel submits that the application form of the petitioners is not being accepted on account of the reason that they are not in possession of certificate of training.
Learned Standing Counsel may obtain instructions and clarify this position by Friday next.
Put up on Friday next i.e. on 10.5.2013.
Order Date :- 7.5.2013
Sahu
