UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News -
HAZARON WRIT COURT MEIN PAD CHUKEE HAIN, FIR AJAB GALAB COURT MATTER
B.Ed. (Special Education) Provisionally Permitted for Selection Process of 72825 Teacher Recruitment, Next Date in Court 18 Feb 2015
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4514 of 2015
Petitioner :- Anjani Kumar Pandey And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Uma Nath Pandey,Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
1. Heard Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Uma Nath Pandey for the petitioners.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the impugned decision of the State Grievance Committee dated 26.12.2014, and consequential order dated 13.1.2015 passed by Director, State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) Lucknow. They have further prayed for a mandamus commanding the respondents to issue the appointment letters to them in their respective category being duly selected candidates along with all consequential benefits.
3. The State Government had issued a Government Order on 27.9.11 for filling up 72,825 vacancies of trained Teachers in Parishadiya Parimary Schools. The advertisement was issued on 01.12.2011 in daily newspaper 'Dainik Jagaran'. In pursuance to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioners applied in different districts after completing the entire formalities. Both the petitioners, having graduation from duly recognised Universities and also having training qualification of B.Ed (Special Education) from U.P. Rajarshi Tandon Open University, Allahabad, have also passed U.P. Teachers' Eligibility Test 2011 (Primary Level). It has also been averred in the writ petition that the B.Ed (Special Education) training given by the U.P. Rajarshi Tandon Open University is duly recognised by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) and both the petitioners are duly registered with RCI. The relevant RCI certificates have also been brought on record as Annexure Nos. 7 and 8 to the writ petition. In pursuance to the advertisement the counselling letters were issued SCERT in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter the petitioner no.1 appeared in 3rd Counselling in District Siddharth Nagar being General, Male, Art candidate and the petitioner no.2 participated in 4th counselling in District Siddharth Nagar being General, Male, Science candidate. The district-wise chart has been prepared in which their names have been shown. A controversy has been crept at the time of counselling where few applicants were not permitted to participate in the counselling on the basis of some Circular dated 27.8.2014 issued by the Director, SCERT, Lucknow in which B.Ed degree is mentioned but B.Ed (Special Education) has not been mentioned. Though the same was mentioned in the Government Order dated 27.9.2011, which categorically provided that the applicants, who had passed B.Ed (Special Education) could also apply. Certain amendments have also been carried out in between.
4. Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that for appointment of teachers, guidelines issued by the NCERT are binding over the authorities. He submits that the petitioners fulfill the criteria laid down by NCERT with B.Ed (Special Education) and only on the basis of possessing B.Ed (Special Education) the petitioners were permitted to participate in the counsellings. In this regard he has emphasized the guidelines and notification dated 29.7.2011 and 30.5.2014, which clearly provide that candidates, who possessed B.Ed (Special Education) are eligible for appointment against the Assistant Teachers in Primary Schools. He further makes submission that the guidelines and instructions issued by SCERT are binding for appointment of Assistant Teachers in Primary School.
5. Shri Ashok Khare has relied upon a Full Bench judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma vs. State of UP and others 2013 (6) ADJ 310 and an order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.1234 of 2013 reported in 2014 (1) ADJ 1. Recently a similar controversy has been been considered by this Court in Special Appeal Defective No. 130 of 2014 (Harsh Kumar vs. State of UP and others decided on 5.2.2014 reported in 2014 (2) ADJ 730. In this background he has also drawn attention of this Court to an interim order dated 30.10.2014 passed in Writ Petition No.54547 of 2014 (Himanshu Mishra and ors vs. State of UP and others), which reads as as follows:-
"Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri S.C. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 & 4 and the learned standing counsel for the State.
Sri R.K. Ojha with reference to provisions contained in the NCTE Notification dated 23.08.2010 as amended in the year 2011, the Government Order dated 27.09.2011 read with the Government Order dated 27.08.2014, the Division Bench judgment of this court dated 05.02.2014 passed in Special Appeal Defective No.130 of 2013 and a recent judgment of the Supreme Court dated 19.09.2014 passed in Special Leave Petitions (CC) No.12060-12061/2014 submits that in the selection in question, the B.Ed. holders have been allowed to participate, but, the petitioners who possess the qualification of B.Ed. (Special) which is a better qualification, are not being allowed to participate. He further submits that as per paragraph-2(kha) of the G.O. dated 27.09.2011, candidates having qualification of B.Ed. (Special Education) have been permitted to participate, subject to the condition that they would undergo a six months special training/ program after appointment and the G.O. dated 27.08.2014 has been issued in continuation of the earlier G.O. dated 27.09.2011. In spite of it, the respondents are not permitting the petitioners to appear in the counselling on the ground that they possess the qualification of B.Ed. (Special).
The matter requires consideration.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that the petitioners shall be allowed to appear in the counselling for the selection of Trainee Teachers of the year 2011, provisionally, subject to verification of their B.Ed. (Special Education) certificates by the concerned authorities.
The respondents may file counter affidavit within six weeks. List thereafter."�
6. Shri Ashok Khare submits that the similar controversy has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Harsh Kumar's case (supra). It was assailed by the State Government by means of Special Leave Petition (C) No.12060-12061 of 2014 (State of UP and ors vs. Harsh Kumar and ors), which was eventually dismissed on 13.1.2015 by Hon'ble Apex Court and the judgment passed in Harsh Kumar's case (supra) has attained finality. He further apprised to the Court to the interim order� dated 30.10.2014 in Himanshu Mishra's case (supra) and no special appeal has been filed against the interim order and still the same is operative but ignoring the mandate issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the State Grievance Committee gave the opinion that the candidates, who possessed B.Ed (Special Education), are not eligible for appointment as Assistant Teachers against the selection of trained teachers, which is patently illegal and clear disobedience to the mandate issued by this Court.
7. In view of above, the matter requires consideration.
8. Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent nos.1, 3, 4, and 6. Shri Ashok Kumar Sing has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 7.� The respondents pray for and are granted a week's time to seek instructions in the matter.
9. As prayed, put up this matter as fresh on 18.2.2015.
10. It is observed that the respondents may carry out the selection process and� two seats would be kept vacant for the petitioners in their respective category.
Order Date :- 2.2.2015
RKP
UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment /SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / 4th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015
HAZARON WRIT COURT MEIN PAD CHUKEE HAIN, FIR AJAB GALAB COURT MATTER
B.Ed. (Special Education) Provisionally Permitted for Selection Process of 72825 Teacher Recruitment, Next Date in Court 18 Feb 2015
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4514 of 2015
Petitioner :- Anjani Kumar Pandey And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Uma Nath Pandey,Ashok Khare
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
1. Heard Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Uma Nath Pandey for the petitioners.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the impugned decision of the State Grievance Committee dated 26.12.2014, and consequential order dated 13.1.2015 passed by Director, State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) Lucknow. They have further prayed for a mandamus commanding the respondents to issue the appointment letters to them in their respective category being duly selected candidates along with all consequential benefits.
3. The State Government had issued a Government Order on 27.9.11 for filling up 72,825 vacancies of trained Teachers in Parishadiya Parimary Schools. The advertisement was issued on 01.12.2011 in daily newspaper 'Dainik Jagaran'. In pursuance to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioners applied in different districts after completing the entire formalities. Both the petitioners, having graduation from duly recognised Universities and also having training qualification of B.Ed (Special Education) from U.P. Rajarshi Tandon Open University, Allahabad, have also passed U.P. Teachers' Eligibility Test 2011 (Primary Level). It has also been averred in the writ petition that the B.Ed (Special Education) training given by the U.P. Rajarshi Tandon Open University is duly recognised by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) and both the petitioners are duly registered with RCI. The relevant RCI certificates have also been brought on record as Annexure Nos. 7 and 8 to the writ petition. In pursuance to the advertisement the counselling letters were issued SCERT in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter the petitioner no.1 appeared in 3rd Counselling in District Siddharth Nagar being General, Male, Art candidate and the petitioner no.2 participated in 4th counselling in District Siddharth Nagar being General, Male, Science candidate. The district-wise chart has been prepared in which their names have been shown. A controversy has been crept at the time of counselling where few applicants were not permitted to participate in the counselling on the basis of some Circular dated 27.8.2014 issued by the Director, SCERT, Lucknow in which B.Ed degree is mentioned but B.Ed (Special Education) has not been mentioned. Though the same was mentioned in the Government Order dated 27.9.2011, which categorically provided that the applicants, who had passed B.Ed (Special Education) could also apply. Certain amendments have also been carried out in between.
4. Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that for appointment of teachers, guidelines issued by the NCERT are binding over the authorities. He submits that the petitioners fulfill the criteria laid down by NCERT with B.Ed (Special Education) and only on the basis of possessing B.Ed (Special Education) the petitioners were permitted to participate in the counsellings. In this regard he has emphasized the guidelines and notification dated 29.7.2011 and 30.5.2014, which clearly provide that candidates, who possessed B.Ed (Special Education) are eligible for appointment against the Assistant Teachers in Primary Schools. He further makes submission that the guidelines and instructions issued by SCERT are binding for appointment of Assistant Teachers in Primary School.
5. Shri Ashok Khare has relied upon a Full Bench judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma vs. State of UP and others 2013 (6) ADJ 310 and an order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.1234 of 2013 reported in 2014 (1) ADJ 1. Recently a similar controversy has been been considered by this Court in Special Appeal Defective No. 130 of 2014 (Harsh Kumar vs. State of UP and others decided on 5.2.2014 reported in 2014 (2) ADJ 730. In this background he has also drawn attention of this Court to an interim order dated 30.10.2014 passed in Writ Petition No.54547 of 2014 (Himanshu Mishra and ors vs. State of UP and others), which reads as as follows:-
"Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri S.C. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 & 4 and the learned standing counsel for the State.
Sri R.K. Ojha with reference to provisions contained in the NCTE Notification dated 23.08.2010 as amended in the year 2011, the Government Order dated 27.09.2011 read with the Government Order dated 27.08.2014, the Division Bench judgment of this court dated 05.02.2014 passed in Special Appeal Defective No.130 of 2013 and a recent judgment of the Supreme Court dated 19.09.2014 passed in Special Leave Petitions (CC) No.12060-12061/2014 submits that in the selection in question, the B.Ed. holders have been allowed to participate, but, the petitioners who possess the qualification of B.Ed. (Special) which is a better qualification, are not being allowed to participate. He further submits that as per paragraph-2(kha) of the G.O. dated 27.09.2011, candidates having qualification of B.Ed. (Special Education) have been permitted to participate, subject to the condition that they would undergo a six months special training/ program after appointment and the G.O. dated 27.08.2014 has been issued in continuation of the earlier G.O. dated 27.09.2011. In spite of it, the respondents are not permitting the petitioners to appear in the counselling on the ground that they possess the qualification of B.Ed. (Special).
The matter requires consideration.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that the petitioners shall be allowed to appear in the counselling for the selection of Trainee Teachers of the year 2011, provisionally, subject to verification of their B.Ed. (Special Education) certificates by the concerned authorities.
The respondents may file counter affidavit within six weeks. List thereafter."�
6. Shri Ashok Khare submits that the similar controversy has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Harsh Kumar's case (supra). It was assailed by the State Government by means of Special Leave Petition (C) No.12060-12061 of 2014 (State of UP and ors vs. Harsh Kumar and ors), which was eventually dismissed on 13.1.2015 by Hon'ble Apex Court and the judgment passed in Harsh Kumar's case (supra) has attained finality. He further apprised to the Court to the interim order� dated 30.10.2014 in Himanshu Mishra's case (supra) and no special appeal has been filed against the interim order and still the same is operative but ignoring the mandate issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the State Grievance Committee gave the opinion that the candidates, who possessed B.Ed (Special Education), are not eligible for appointment as Assistant Teachers against the selection of trained teachers, which is patently illegal and clear disobedience to the mandate issued by this Court.
7. In view of above, the matter requires consideration.
8. Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent nos.1, 3, 4, and 6. Shri Ashok Kumar Sing has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 7.� The respondents pray for and are granted a week's time to seek instructions in the matter.
9. As prayed, put up this matter as fresh on 18.2.2015.
10. It is observed that the respondents may carry out the selection process and� two seats would be kept vacant for the petitioners in their respective category.
Order Date :- 2.2.2015
RKP
UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment /SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / 4th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015
