CTET : Without CTET Appointment of 9 Teacher is Cancelled
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHIDIRECTORATE OF EDUCATIONOLD SECRETARIAT, DELHI-110 054. No, 1981,81,
ORDER Whereas, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide order dated16.04.2013 in WPC No. 5270/2012 and CM No. 3271/2013 hasdirected as under: -
“Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has instructions to withdraw the writ petition inasmuch as not oniythe petitioner but aiso the teachers are intending to file an appropriate representation with the Director of Educationunder Rule 97 of the Delhi Schooi Education Rules, 1973. On the representation being made either by the petitioneror by the concerned teachers, Director of Education is directed to take decision on the said representation within a period of eight weeks of the same being received. ” And whereas, vide order no. 330508 dated 03.08.2012 it wasordered as under - "Whereas, DTEA (Regd.) is a society which is running 07 schoois inDeihi, which are as foiiows :— DTEA, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi. DTEA, RK. Puram, New Deihi. DTEA, Pusa Road, New Deihi.DTEA, Moti Bagh, New Dehi.DTEA, Janakpuri, New Deihi.DTEA, Mandir Marg, New Deihi.DTEA, Laxmi Bai Nagar, New Deihi And whereas, vide notification of Directorate of Education No.F.4(6)(350)/E-iV/2011/621 dated 07/10/2011 in pursuance of sub-section (1) of section 23 of the Right of Chiidren to Free andCompuisory Education Act, 2009 (35 of 2009) the Nationai Councilfor Teacher Education (NCTE) vide Notification No. 215 F,No. 61— 03/20/2010/NCTE(N&S) dated 23/08/2010 iaid down one of the minimum essentiai quaiification for a person to be eiigihie for appointment as a teacher in class—I to IVI H in a school referred to inclause (n) of section 2 of the said Act that he/she should pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted by the appropriate Govt in accordance with the guidelines framed by National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) for the purpose. And whereas, vide notification no. F No. DE 4(6)(350)/E— IV/2011/18875-18924 dated 26/12/2011 regarding recognize only Central Teachers Eligibility Test (CTET) conducted by the CentralBoard of Secondary Education (CBSE) for appointment of teachers f0rclass I—V and class VI-VHI in the schools of Delhi in lieu of any StateTeacher Eligibility Test was circulated for information of allconcerned, And whereas, a clarification dated 29/02/2012 was issued by theDirector of Education reiterating that w.e.f. the aforesaid notificationonly CTET qualified teachers shall be employed by the Govt. AidedSchools as referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of RTE Act, 2009. And whereas, the Secretary of DTEA (Regd.) Schools of Delhi sought clearance from the
office of Directorate of Education for filling up 54 vacant posts including 10 posts of Trained Graduate Teachers and 06 posts of Asstt. Teachers by direct recruitment on 24/11/2011. And whereas, the Staff Selection Committee meeting was held on 01/02/2012, 04/02/2012, 13/02/2012 and 03/03/2012 under rule96(3)(b) of DSER, 1973, to appoint 10 TGTs and 06 Asstt. Teachersin DTEA Schools. And whereas, the crux of some of the orders given by the l-lon’ble Supreme Court of India and High Courts in regard to the irregularities committed in the selection of the candidates needs to be highlighted before coming to a logical conclusion and passing of an appropriateorder :-
(i) "Once the process of selection is found to be tainted, whatever had flowed consequent there to must also fall along with the process of selection. ” - Satpal V/s Union of India 1995, Sec (1) Suppl 206.
(ii) “If on the date of selection, a particular candidate does not full fill the minimum qualifications, he is not entitled for appointment on the post.”
Dr. (Miss) Raj Kurnari Shanna V/s Chancellor MeerutUniversity, 1978, AU 831. (iii) "The selection and appointments of persons, made incontravention of ordinance 9 (2)(i) prescribed essential qualification is illegal. ” Dr. J. P. Kulshreshtha V/s Chancellor, Allahabad. And whereas, on noticing the discrepancies found in theaforesaid appointments, a show cause notice no. F.DE/DDE/SW—A/259—262 dated 30/06/2012 was issued to the Secretary DTEA schools. And whereas, the reply submitted by the Honorary President ofDTEA (Regd.) vide letter dated 09/07/2012 has been found unsatisfactory. Now, therefore, I AMIT
SINGLA, Director of Education pass an order for cancelling the selection/ appointments of those candidatesas Trained Graduate Teachers and Asstt. Teachers who have not qualified the Central Teachers Eligibility Test (CTET), which is mandatory condition for appointment to the posts as these selections/appointments are in COntra vention/violation of the directions issued inthe above said notifications. ” And whereas, pursuant to the directions of the Hon’ble HighCourt dated 16.04.2013 in WPC No. 5270/2012 and CM No.3271/2013 a representation dated 08.05.2013 was received in the DIreCtOrate of Education from 09 TGT teachers, as detailed below,with the requests to exercise the powers under rule 97 of the DSEAR,1973 and relax the qualification of passing of CTET in their case and consequently release their salaries. . Mrs. Lalita . Mrs. Deepti . Sangeetha Vikramji V.V.. Mrs. SAvita Rani Mrs. Kajal Jaggi Mrs. S. Susa Mr. Ravishankar Meena Ms. Jyotsna Gosa Mrs. A. Maria Pushpalatha
And whereas, it is observed that the applicants have made theaforesaid request for relaxation under rule 97 of the DSEAR, 1973 onthe following grounds
1. Though the notification was issued on 07.10.2011 the officials ofthe Department neither informed this mandatory requirement of qualifying CTET nor incorporated the same in the advertisement.
2. The availability of CTET qualified candidates was negligible since the pass percentage in these exams has been ranging from 0.45% to7.00% only.
3. In a recent case bearing CA No. 1383f2013— Sushma and PushpaKhanduri and others Vs. Delhi Subordiante Services Selection Board(05555) and others, Hon’bie Judicial Member Dr. D. P. Sharma andSudhir Kumar have passed an order allowing the non CTET qualified candidates to take the teachers recruitment exam held by 05555,New Delhi under Section 23(2) of Right of Children for Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. It implies that passing of CTET forrecruitment of teachers under the Government of Delhi is relaxable.
4. One of the applicant has cleared the CTET exam in November, 2012 and the others have applied for appearing in the CTET exam scheduleto be held in July, 2013.
5. Due to acute shortage of CTET qualified teachers the government is deploying non CTET qualified candidates as Guest Teachers. And whereas, the contention of the applicants that the department had circulated the notification making CTET mandatory on 29.02.2012 only is misplaced and misfounded. The Directorate hadnotified passing of Teacher's Eligibiiity Test as one of the minimum essential qualification for appointment as a teacher in class I to VIII vide notification dated 07.10.2011. Further, notification dated 26.12.2011 whereby the Central Teacher’s Eligibility Test (CTET) conducted by the CBSE was recognized for appointment as teachers inclass I to VIII in schools of Delhi was also circulated for information of all concerned. The Circular dated 29.02.2012 stated by the applicantswas merely a clarification reiterating the previous notifications. And whereas, regarding the issue of non availability of CTET quaiified candidates it may be seen that the Hon’ble High Court ofDelhi vide order dated 22.04.2013 in WPC No. 2544/2013 titled as Ruchika Arora & Ors V5. UOI & Ors has observed as under —
“7. So far as the issue of there not being adequate numbers of Special Education Teachers is concerned, first of all I cannot believe such a self serving averment that there are not enough Special Education Teachers having CTET qualifications because there is no basis on facts and documents to substantiate the same. In my opinion, this is an issue which the appropriate authOrities will consider, including the authorities which are seeking employment for the Special Education Teachers.However, Courts cannot interfere in matters, merely on presumptive issues of there not existing adequate number ofteachers. ” And whereas, the matter regarding the order supposedly passedin OA No. 1383/2013 was also examined and it is seen that no copy ofthe said Orders have been annexed by the applicants with theirrepresentation. The applicants have simply annexed copy of anewspaper clipping which cannot be given much importance.However, it may be seen that the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi videorder dated 22.04.2013 in WPC No. 2544/2013 titled as Ruchika Arora & Ors Vs. UOI & Ors at para 3 & 6 has observed as under—
“3.The requirement of teachers, holding the otherqualification, of clearing the C TE T Test conducted by CBSE, wasas to bring about better education standards. Powers wereaccordingly exercised by the appropriate authority from timeto time under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The National Council for Teacher Education vide its circular dated 11.02.2011 has issued the guidelines for conducting Teacher Eligibility Tests under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. CTET examinations are accordingly being conducted for the teachers ..... ..
6. In my opinion, the writ petition is clearly misconceived for the reason that his Court cannot sit in the place of the appropriate authority which decides qualifications for being employed as teachers. IN the present case, so far as theemployer is concerned, being the National Capital Territory ofDelhi, it has quite clearly been prescribed in the advertisementthat the Special Education Teachers must have CTETqualification. 1 do not think that there is any illegality orabsurdity in any employer asking that to seekappointment/employment as a teacher, he/she must have CTET qualification, and which qualification was to bring abouta higher standard of education. ”
Page 6
And whereas, considering the request of the applicants that most of them are appearing in the forthcoming CTET exam scheduled to beheld in July, 2013, it is pointed out that as per rule the candidates are supposed to have the minimum qualifications at the time of initial recruitment and not obtain them subsequently. And whereas, regarding the claim of the applicant that e
ven the government was deploying non CTET qualified candidates as Guest teachers due to acute shortage of CTET qualified teachers, it is pertinent to point out that the Directorate of Education is recruiting CTET qualified candidates only during the direct recruitment through DSSSB as well as during appointment of contract teachers under SSA.
As regards Guest Teachers it is infOrmed that they appointed on per period basis only. As such they are not covered under either the direct recruit category or the contract teacher category and are purely temporary on per period basis, as per requirement, unlike the case of these
09 applicants who are seeking recruitment on permanent basis.However, it is worth mentioning that even in the case of guestteachers the Directorate of Education endeavours to appoint CTETqualified candidates only in the first instance. And whereas, the submissions of the applicant have been considered and it is observed that Rule 100 of the DSEAR, 1973 prescribes that no teacher shall be recruited by any school who doesnot fulfill the minimum qualifications prescribed by the RecruitmentRules. And whereas, Rule 97 of the DSEAR, 1973, provides that wherethe relaxation of any essential qualification for the recruitment of any employee is recommended by the appropriate selection committee,the managing committee of the school shall not give effect to suchrecommendation unless such recommendation has been previouslyapproved by the Director. And whereas, it is also observed that as per the provision of the Rule 97 & 103 of the DSEAR, 1973 the prior approval of the ‘Director’ for such relaxation has to be obtained by the Managing Committee ofthe school without which no appointments can be made. Thisprovision has also not been followed in the present case. Even otherwise the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 prescribes that quality of teaching is to be maintained and forthis regard the minimum qualification as laid down by an academicauthority authorized by the Central Government by notification has tobe followed as laid down in Section 23(1) of the said Act. Thenotification mandating CTET to be compulsory has been madepursuant to the notification dated 23.08.2010 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), an academic authority authorized by the Central Government.
Now, therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances therequest of the 09 applicants for relaxing the qualification of passing CTET and consequently releasing the salary cannot be accepted and the application is rejected.
This order may also be considered as a warning to the Managing Committee of the concerned school for violating the provisions of DSEAR, 1973. The District authorities andDE's nominees are also directed to be careful in future. NO- 3MB r 3”, Copy for information to — . The Honorary President of DTEA (Regd.), Lodhi Estate, New Delhi. . Spl. Director of Education (Act-II), Directorate of Education. . Regional Director of Education (South), Directorate of Education. . DDE (SW—A)/Nodai Officer for DTEA Schools with the direction toserve upon a copy of the order to the Secretary (DTEA) and all the09 applicants through special messenger. .__,All the O9 applicants. . 05 (IT) with the request to upload the same on the website. (Dr. Afshan Yasmin)ADE (Act-II)
Source :
http://www.edudel.nic.in/upload_2013_14/798_811_dt_03062013.pdf
