TET : प्राथमिक शिक्षकों की भर्तियों मैं अब बी एड धारी पात्र , राज्य केंद्र एवं देश भर के प्राथमिक शिक्षकों की भर्ती में मौका मिल सकेगा , लेकिन प्राथमिक लेवल टेट परीक्षा पास करनी होगी

TET : प्राथमिक शिक्षकों की भर्तियों  मैं अब बी एड धारी पात्र , राज्य  केंद्र एवं देश भर के प्राथमिक शिक्षकों की भर्ती में मौका मिल सकेगा , लेकिन प्राथमिक लेवल टेट परीक्षा पास करनी होगी 

हिंदुस्तान भर के किसी भी स्कूल में बी एड अब प्राथमिक शिक्षकों के लिए भी योग्यता निर्धारित हो गयी है ,
इससे बी एड के सामने देश लाखों भर के लाखों शिक्षकों की भर्तियों में मौका मिल गया है , अकेले यु पी में 1 लाख प्राथमिक शिक्षकों की भर्ती होने जा रही है ,

केंद्रीय व सरकारी सहायता प्राप्त स्कूलों में भी मौका मिल गया है 

29 जुलाई 2011 के नोटिफिकेशन में सशोधन हो चुका है और प्राथमिक शिक्षक बनने के लिए टेट लेवल -1 परीक्षा के लिए अब B Ed धारी भी पात्र हैं | 
See here : http://ncte-india.org/ncte_new/pdf/Gazette_notification.pdf

गजट / राजपत्र नोटिफिकेशन को तत्काल प्रभाव से लागु किया जाता है , प्राथमिक शिक्षकों की भर्तियों  मैं अब बी एड धारी पात्र , लेकिन प्राथमिक लेवल टेट परीक्षा पास करनी होगी 

F. No. NCTE-Regl 012/16/2018.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 23 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act. 2009 (35 of 2009) and in pursuance of notification number S.O. 750(E), dated the 31st March, 2010 issued by the Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) hereby makes the following further amendments to the notification number F.N. 61-03/20/2010/NCTE/(N&S), dated the 23rd August, 2010, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4, dated the 25th August, 2010, hereinafter referred to as the said notification namely:— (1) In the said notification, in para 1 in sub-para (i), in clause (a) after the words and brackets “Graduation and two year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known), the following shall be inserted, namely:- OR “Graduation with at least 50 % marks and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.)” 2. In the said notification in para 3, for sub-para(a), the following sub-para shall be substituted namely:- “(a) who has acquired the qualification of Bachelor of Education from any NCTE recognized institution shall be considered for appointment as a teacher in classes I to V provided the person so appointed as a teacher shall mandatorily undergo a six month Bridge Course in Elementary Education recognized by the NCTE, within two years of such appointment as primary teacher”. SANJAY AWASTHI, Member Secy. [ADVT.-III/4/Exty./121/18-19] Note : The Principal Notification was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4, dated the 25th August, 2010 vide number 64-03/20/2010/NCTE(N&S), dated the 23rd August, 2010 and amended vide number 61-1/2011/NCTE(N&S), dated the 29th July, 2011

A

Read more...

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News -CTET NE SPASHT KIYA KI CANFIDATE TET MARKS BADANE KE LIYE BAAR BAAR -CTET EXAM DE SAKTA HAI -

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News -CTET NE SPASHT KIYA KI CANFIDATE TET MARKS BADANE KE LIYE BAAR BAAR -CTET EXAM DE SAKTA HAI -

Yeh NCTE GUIDELINES KE TAHT JAAREE KIYE NIRDESH HAIN,
LEKIN JAB EK CANDIDATE BAHUT ACHHE TET MARKS LE KAR BHEE SELECTION MEI USKA WEIGHTAGE NAHIN LE PAAYEGA, TO BEROJGARON SE AISEE LOOT KHASOT KYON.

NCTE KO RTE ACT KE TAHT MINIMUM QUALIFICATION TAY KARNE KI POWER  DEE GAYEE HAI ->>>FOR CLASS 1 TO 8 TEACHERS SELECTION PROCESS KE LEEYE 

who has qualified CTET may also appear again for improving his/her score

There is no restriction on the number of attempts a person can take for acquiring a CTET Certificate. A person who has qualified CTET may also appear again for improving his/her score

http://ctet.nic.in/CMS/Public/View.aspx?page=59

 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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
 Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | 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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - - Private / Aided Schools mein Bager TET Ke Bhrtee Avedh, High Court ne Kaha kee NCTE Notification / Central Act Prbhavee Hai State Govt Act 1981 Ke Oopar, Aur Isleeye Kendra (NCTE/ RTE Act) ko Paalan Kiya Jana Jaruree Rajya Sarkar ke Oopar Kendra Sarkar Ka Niyam Havee Aur Isleeye NCTE / RTE Act ke taht Hongee Bhrtiyan, Rajya sarkar Apnee Seema Ke Bheetar Hee Kanoon Bana Saktee hai

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - - 

Private / Aided Schools mein Bager TET Ke Bhrtee Avedh, High Court ne Kaha kee NCTE Notification / Central Act Prbhavee Hai State Govt Act 1981 Ke Oopar,
Aur Isleeye Kendra (NCTE/ RTE Act) ko Paalan Kiya Jana Jaruree

Rajya Sarkar ke Oopar Kendra Sarkar Ka Niyam Havee Aur Isleeye NCTE / RTE Act ke taht Hongee Bhrtiyan,
Rajya sarkar Apnee Seema Ke Bheetar Hee Kanoon Bana Saktee hai


The legislative competence and the intent therefore lead to the conclusion that the Central Government has authorised the National Council for Teacher Education to make provisions and which have been carefully en-grafted in the Notification dated 23.8.2010. The State Government has followed suit. However, the State Government delayed the incorporation as the Rules were framed by it later on in 2011 and the 1981 Rules were amended much later. The 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th amendment in the 1981 Rules were brought at a later period. In our opinion, however, merely because the State incorporated these provisions in its rules later on would not take away the impact of the norms prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education that stood enforced w.e.f. 23.8.2010. The delegated legislation of the State Government was subject to the primary legislation of the Central Government. The framing of rules as a subordinate legislation is subservient to the provisions framed by the Central Government. The notification dated 23.8.2010 therefore has an overriding effect and it could not have been ignored. If the State Government has proceeded to make appointments after 23.8.2010 without complying with the provisions of teacher eligibility test then such appointments would be deficient in such qualification." 


HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

?Court No. - 7 

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16049 of 2016 

Petitioner :- Jagbeer Singh And Another 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others 
Counsel for Petitioner :- J.P. Singh,Ashok Khare,Dhirendra Singh 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bajrang Bahadur Singh,Satya Prakash Singh 

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. 
Two rejoinder affidavits filed today are taken on record. 
Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents no.7 to 13 and Sri Mata Prasad, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents no.1 to 5. 
The petitioners are seeking quashing of the orders dated 14.03.2016 and 16.03.2016 whereby the required eligibility qualification of TET in the case of concerned private respondents has been waived on the ground that the selection process had commenced prior to the issuance of the Notification dated 08.04.2013 and the requirement of possession of the eligibility TET Examination can only be effected after the Government Order dated 08.04.2013. 
A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner no.1 is stated to be the outgoing Treasurer/Life Member of the Committee of Management of the General Body of the Gurukul Sarvoday Inter College, Panchli Khurd, Meerut and the petitioner no.2 is stated to be the Life Member of the General Body of the Gurukul Sarvoday Inter College, Panchli Khurd, Meerut, therefore, the writ petition on behalf of the petitioners is not maintainable. 
Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel, on the other hand, placed reliance upon a Division Bench decision of this Court passed in Special Appeal No.266 of 2015, Salauddin Vs. State of U.P. and Others wherein the Division Bench has held as under: 
"The appellant has filed an application for leave to appeal, which has been allowed. 
A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the sixth respondent to the maintainability of the appeal, on the ground that the appellant, who is his own brother, has no locus to challenge the order of the learned Single Judge, particularly having regard to the observations which were contained in the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23 July 2013. The issue before the Court is as to whether the special appeal would be maintainable at the behest of the appellant. It is not in dispute that the appellant is the complainant at whose behest the enquiry was initiated against the sixth respondent. The sixth respondent has obtained employment as an Assistant Teacher in an aided institution and is in receipt of salary from the public exchequer. The private dispute between the appellant and the sixth respondent may be a reason for the Court to tread in a matter, such as the present, with a great deal of circumspection and caution. However, the issue still remains as to whether the Court should shut its eyes to the facts which have been placed on the record. In our view, there is an element of public interest involved where a person, who has obtained public employment and is in receipt of salary from an institution which is aided by the State, seeks to do so on the basis of documentary record indicating a particular date of birth. 
We are of the view that the learned Single Judge having found merit in the substance of the grievance of the sixth respondent that the order against him was passed without complying with the principles of natural justice, should have set aside that order and remanded the proceedings back to the authority for a fresh decision after complying with the principles of natural justice. Having come to the conclusion that there was a breach of those principles, the learned Single Judge manifestly exceeded the jurisdiction under Article 226 by launching upon an enquiry of the Court in regard to what is the correct date of birth of the sixth respondent. The law on the subject is indeed well settled. Where a breach of natural justice has occurred during the course of an enquiry, the appropriate course for the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is to set aside the ultimate decision which is complained of and to remit the proceedings back to the authority concerned to conclude the enquiry from the stage at which the breach of those principles have occurred. 
For the purpose of these proceedings, we are desisting from making any observation on the merits of the rival contentions so as to not preclude a fair and proper enquiry being conducted by the competent authority. However, it would suffice to note that having duly considered the material which has been placed on the record of these proceedings, we are emphatically of the view that a proper enquiry by the competent authority should not be stultified or obstructed and the law must be allowed to take its own course. Insofar as the aspect of locus is concerned, it is not now in dispute that though the earlier writ petition of the appellant was dismissed, an enquiry was initiated by the State. Once the process of conducting an enquiry has been initiated, it is necessary to ensure that enquiry is taken to its logical conclusion in accordance with law. If a breach of the principles of natural justice had occurred, that could be remedied by setting aside the order and restoring the proceedings back to the competent authority. 
For these reasons, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge was in error in entering upon the merits and rendering a finding of fact once the contention of the sixth respondent that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice was accepted. The Court must not also be oblivious of the fact that in such matters, the process of enquiry is set in motion often by a complainant. The fact that the complainant may have some interest of his own, is a ground for the Court to act with care but that cannot shut out a proper enquiry altogether, particularly in a case, such as the present, where the sixth respondent is in the employment of an aided educational institution and is drawing his salary from the public exchequer. For these reasons, we allow the special appeal in part. " 
For the reasons aforesaid it cannot be said that the writ petition is not maintainable at the behest of the petitioners. 
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents No.7 to 13 have been appointed as Assistant Teacher. The impugned order dated 14.03.2016 of the Regional Level Committee proposes to grant approval to such appointment and the consequential order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 16.03.2016. 
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this controversy has already been settled by this Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in [2013 (6) 310 (FB)]. Paragraphs 86 & 87 of the judgment reads as under: 
"86. We fully approve the view of the division bench in Prabhakar Singh's case confirming the authority of the Central Government and the NCTE to prescribe the qualifications as detailed in Para 52 and 53 of the reported judgment. We are also in complete agreement with the division bench that after the coming into force of the 2009 Act and the prescription of qualifications thereunder through the Academic Authority the State is not a free agent as held in Para 51 thereof. The failure of the State Government to timely implement the qualifications prescribed before making any appointment after 23.8.2010 will not dilute or take away the impact of the notification which is mandatory. Every rule of the State Government for qualification has to be abide by the same by virtue of the force of Section 23 (1) of the 2009 Act. 

87. The legislative competence and the intent therefore lead to the conclusion that the Central Government has authorised the National Council for Teacher Education to make provisions and which have been carefully en-grafted in the Notification dated 23.8.2010. The State Government has followed suit. However, the State Government delayed the incorporation as the Rules were framed by it later on in 2011 and the 1981 Rules were amended much later. The 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th amendment in the 1981 Rules were brought at a later period. In our opinion, however, merely because the State incorporated these provisions in its rules later on would not take away the impact of the norms prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education that stood enforced w.e.f. 23.8.2010. The delegated legislation of the State Government was subject to the primary legislation of the Central Government. The framing of rules as a subordinate legislation is subservient to the provisions framed by the Central Government. The notification dated 23.8.2010 therefore has an overriding effect and it could not have been ignored. If the State Government has proceeded to make appointments after 23.8.2010 without complying with the provisions of teacher eligibility test then such appointments would be deficient in such qualification." 
It is submitted that the Full Bench has held that a notification was issued by the National Council for Teacher Education on 23.08.2010 holding that the Teachers Eligibility Test is compulsory for teachers to qualify and the Full Bench has held that all appointments made after 23.08.2010 will not dilute or take away the impact of the notification which is mandatory.� It was further held that merely because the State Government delayed the incorporation of the rules it cannot take away the impact of the requirement of the notification dated 23.08.2010. 
The submission of the learned Senior Counsel is that the respondents no.7 to 13 have not qualified the TET Examination. 
This factual position has been disputed by Sri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents submitting that the respondent no.9 has passed his TET. However, this fact has not been disclosed in his counter affidavit but the photocopy of the certificate issued on 25.11.2011 by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad of the U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test-2011 (Primary Level) has been passed on to the Court during the course of the arguments. 
For reasons aforesaid the impugned order dated 14.03.2016 passed by the Regional Level Committee and the order dated 16.03.2016 passed by the District Inspector of Schools cannot survive and are accordingly quashed. 
The writ petition is allowed. 
The matter shall now be reconsidered by the Regional Level Committee in the light of the observations made above and the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Sharma (supra) and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received in his office. 
Order Date :- 10.5.2016 
N Tiwari 

 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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
 Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | 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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - 82 TET Marks Candidate are Passed or Not - A big dabate on social media -

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - 82 TET Marks Candidate are Passed or Not - A big dabate on social media - 

82 Marks Issue In - Social Media. Some Candidates shared below order -
In some highcourt order 82 Marks candidate were not eligible

However I felt NCTE guidelines said relaxation of 5% marks is based on State Govt reservation policy else 60% marks candidate are only passed.
CTET considered 60% for GEN and 55% for Reserved Category.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 30

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 383 of 2013

Petitioner :- Kamta Prasad
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Special Secretary & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Manoj Kumar Yadav
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Archana Tyagi

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pankaj Tyagi, Advocate for respondents.
Applications have been invited by means of advertisement dated 5th December, 2012 and the said advertisement in question proceeds to mention that only those candidates are eligible to apply, who have successfully passed the U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test. The said advertisement in question proceeds to mention that those candidates would be treated as eligible who in U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test have secured 60% marks and in reference to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and OBC category, who have received 55% marks.
Accepted position is that petitioner has secured 54.67% marks as he has secured 82 marks in U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test out of 150 marks and petitioner's submission is that from the total number of 150 questions, it is an impossibility for a candidate to secure 55% marks as no candidate can achieve 82.5 marks in the said examination. Petitioner has further proceeded to mention that either a candidate will secure 82 marks which would mean 54.67% marks or 83 marks which would mean 55.33% marks and in view of this securing 55% marks by a candidate i.e. 82.5 is an impossibility. Petitioner in this background has contended that 54.67% marks should be rounded up and treated as 55% marks.
Shri Manoj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that a practically impossible situation has been created as awarding of 82.5 marks which is equal to 55% marks is an impossibility and in view of this writ petition deserves to be allowed by considering 54.67 marks as 55%.
Countering the said submission Shri Pankaj Tyagi, Advocate on the other hand contended that a candidate who has to be accepted as successful has to secure on the minimum side 55% marks and in view of this only those candidates who have secured 83 marks in U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test are being treated as eligible and 54.67% cannot be treated to be equivalent to 55%, as such present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Question is can 54.67% marks in aggregate be treated minimum 55% in aggregate? Admittedly 54.67% marks in aggregate are less than 55% marks in aggregate. In view of this by no stretch of imagination it can be accepted that petitioner has to his credit the eligibility criteria so prescribed. Said issue in the past has already been negated by this Court, as per the judgement in the case of Ranjana Kushwaha Vs. state of U.P. 2009 (2) E&MC 94, wherein also requirement was 45% and candidate had received 44.8%, therein candidate have been held to be ineligible, and in the said judgement, have been the two earlier judgements have been referred to wherein 49.67% and 49.66% have not been accepted as equivalent to 50%, namely the case of Vani Pali Tripathi Vs. Director, 2003(1) UPLBEC 427; Pranjal Bishnoi Vs. U.P. Technical University 2003 (3) ESC 1470. In such a situation 54.67% marks cannot be treated as equivalent to 55% when emphasis is given in the eligibility criteria, to the minimum mark to be there, then said minimum makes has to be obtained by concerned candidate and there can not be any scope of compromise with the same by invoking principal of rounding up.

Apex Court in the case of Orissa Public Service Commissioner. vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr (CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6201 OF 2011) decided on 02.08.2011 reported in 2011 (8) SCC 108 has taken view that in order to qualify in the written examination a candidate has to obtain a minimum of 33% marks in each of the papers and not less than 45% of marks in the aggregate in all the written papers in the Main examination. When emphasis is given in the Rules itself to the minimum marks to be obtained making it clear that at least the said minimum marks have to be obtained by the concerned candidate there cannot be a question of relaxation or rounding off. Relevant extract of the aforesaid judgement is being extracted below:

"9. A bare reading of the aforesaid rules would make it crystal clear that in order to qualify in the written examination a candidate has to obtain a minimum of 33% marks in each of the papers and not less than 45% of marks in the aggregate in all the written papers in the Main examination. When emphasis is given in the Rules itself to the minimum marks to be obtained making it clear that at least the said minimum marks have to be obtained by the concerned candidate there cannot be a question of relaxation or rounding off.
10. There is no power provided in the statute/Rules permitting any such rounding off or giving grace marks so as to bring up a candidate to the minimum requirement. In our considered opinion, no such rounding off or relaxation was permissible. The Rules are statutory in nature and no dilution or amendment to such Rules is permissible or possible by adding some words to the said statutory rules for giving the benefit of rounding off or relaxation.
11. We may also draw support in this connection from a decision of this Court in District Collector & Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society, Vizianagaram and Another. v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi reported in (1990) 3 SCC 655. In the said judgment this Court has laid down that when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same then it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The aggrieved are all those who had similar or even better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement.
12. The entire record of the main written examination was also produced before us which indicates that there are also candidates who have got more than the respondent in the aggregate but has not been able to get 33% marks in each paper and have missed it only by a whisker. In case, the contention of the counsel appearing for the respondent is accepted then those candidates who could not get 33% marks in each paper in the Main written examination could and should have also been called for viva-voce examination, which would amount to a very strange and complicated situation and also would lead to the violation of the sanctity of statutory provision.
13. When the words of a statute are clear, plain or unambiguous, i.e., they are reasonably susceptible to only one meaning, the courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of consequences, for the Act speaks for itself. There is no ambiguity in the language of Rule 24 leading to two conclusions and allowing an interpretation in favour of the respondent which would be different to what was intended by the Statute. Therefore, no rounding off of the aggregate marks is permitted in view of the clear and unambiguous language of Rule 24 of the Rules under consideration."

The requirement under law is of having 55% marks by a candidate and in view of this a candidate who has secured less than 55% marks i.e. less than 82.5 marks in U.P. Teacher Eligibility Test, cannot be treated as eligible by any means and those candidates who have got less than 55% on plain mathematical calculation have been treated to be ineligible, accordingly, theory as has been suggested by petitioner that as it would be an act of impossibility cannot be accepted.
Consequently no relief or reprieve can be accorded to the petitioner, and writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.1.2013
Shekhar
 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - Old Decsion of UP State Cabinet to Appoint Shiksha Mitra as Asst Teacher, and Made TET as Qualifying Test only on 23rd July 2012 -

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - Old Decsion of UP State Cabinet to Appoint Shiksha Mitra as Asst Teacher, and Made TET as Qualifying Test only on 23rd July 2012 - 

Decision taken to appoint 'Shiksha Mitra' as assistant teachers at
government primary schools after imparting them  2 year's
training through distance learning programmes At the cabinet meeting chaired by the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mr.  Akhilesh Yadav, it was decided that the untrained 'shiksha mitra' would be
trained  through  distance  learning  programmes  for  two  years  and  then  appointed as assistant teachers in government primary sc
hools run by the  Basic  Shiksha  Parishad.  According  to  the  cabinet  decision, as  per  the  directives issued by the state government dated July 11 , 2011 for training of  the  'shiksha  mitra',  1,24,000  graduate  'shiksha  mitra'   are  proposed  to  be
trained in two batches, the first batch of 62,000 'shiksha mitra' in July 2011  and second batch of 62,000 in July 2013.
The  cabinet  also  approved  the  proposal  to  train  the  second  batch  in July 2012. In the same way 62,000 trained candidates w
ould be posted in July 2013, 62,000 in July 2014 and 48,000 in July 2015. This includes the intermediate  qualified  'shiksha  mitra'  also.  The  moment  they  achieve graduate  qualification,  the  state  government  would  also  consider  their  appointment  as  teachers.  Sanction  would  be  taken  from  the  National Teachers Education Council about the intermediate qualified 'shiksha mitra'.
During the training they would be identified by the  first posting date of  the Shiksha Mitra. Thereby meaning that the ones who
have been posted in  Gram  Panchayats  first  will  be  kept  above  in  the  seniority  list.  If  many  'shiksha mitra' had same date of appointment  then the  one having higher  educational  qualifications  would  be  considered  senior.  If  the  appointment
date and the educational qualifications are also the same, the date of birth   would  be  considered  for  seniority  of  'shiksha  mitra;  and
  the  older  person  would be considered senior. In this process the reservation  would be duly  implemented.
**********
Cabinet decides to make the Teachers Eligibility Test 2011 
a qualifying examination 
Present Basic Education (Teachers) Services Rules   to be amended and past system to be restored At a cabinet meeting chaired by the Chief Minister Mr . Akhilesh Yadav  at  the  Lal  Bahadur  Shastri  Bhawan  here  today,  a  decision  to  make  the  Teachers Eligibility Test -2011 a qualifying exam was taken. It is pertinent to
mention  here  that  the  union  government  conceptualized   the  TET  as  a qualifying  examination.  It  was  henceforth  decided  tha t  it  was  in  the  basic  spirit legally to make it a qualifying exam.
Following  this  order,  the  state  government  will  not  have  to
immediately hold the TET and selecting candidates qualifying the TET 2011  as teachers would be made possible. The candidates who have passed the  TET  2011  for  junior  high  school  level  will  not  be  eligible  for  the  posts  of  teachers under the Basic Shiksha Parishad but will instead  be only eligible  for vacant positions in government aided or private  schools.
It  is  to  be  mentioned  here  that  the  committee  formed
by  the  state  government   under   the   chairmanship   of   the   chief   secretary   had  recommended  to  make  the  TET  2011  a  qualifying  exam.
After  the  recommendations of this committee being accepted by the state cabinet, the  basis  of  selection  of  teachers  would  be,  as  in  the  past,  educational  qualifications  of  the  candidates  and  the  marks  he  has  scored  at  different  levels.
Because of this, effect of irregularities on the selection  process of the  TET 2011 would be zero. After the decision of the cabinet the existing Basic  Education  (Teachers)  Service  Rules  would  be  amended  and the  previous  system would be restored. The press release issued for appointment recently  will  be  cancelled  and,  a  fresh  recruitment  advertisement   based  on  the  amended  rules  would  be  issued  at  district  level  and  the  process  of
appointment would be started.
********* 
Source : http://information.up.nic.in/View_engnews.aspx?id=54

 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - No TET needed for minority institutions: HC

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News -

No TET needed for minority institutions: HC

Court says test isn't a qualification, minority schools across state free to follow their own selection criteria.

The teachers eligibility test (TET) is no longer mandatory for minority schools. The Bombay High Court's Aurangabad bench has decried that minority schools in Maharashtra are now free to follow their own selection processes for teachers' appointment.

While hearing the case of a local minority school teacher's appointment being challenged by the state authorities for not having a TET score, the court ruled that the government cannot interfere with the minority institutions and their admission process. "The TET for teachers' appointment is a methodology accepted by the government, but it's not a qualification. It's rather a selection process from the given lot, which is why minority institutions aren't expected to follow the mandate," the court stated.

The minority institutions have reacted positively to the ruling. "This comes as a great relief to us and it was a difficult task to make state officials realise the admission processes that take place here. We are expected to follow the law of the land and adhere to minimum qualification mandates. But a TET is just a process of selection chosen by the government to pick from a qualified lot. Having a DEd or BEd candidate is a basic requirement, but how such a candidate might be selected is something that's best left to the institute itself. The government shouldn't interfere with this," said PA Inamdar, president of the Linguistic and Religious Minority Educational Institutions' Association.

Immanuel Durairaj, public relations officer at Spicer University, another minority institution from the city, said, "Being exempted from TET and other government diktats will ensure that we can run our institutions in tandem with our religious beliefs. This is definitely an advantage."

However, Shivaji Khandekar, president of the association of teaching and non-teaching staff of schools, chose to differ. "This will disturb the uniformity as the quality is different at different schools. With TET being discontinued, teachers' appointments would be based on varying parameters. With this level of freedom, the institutions can take advantage of appointing candidates, who are lesser qualified."


 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - Para Teacher Requirement of TET in Court -

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - High Court - TET Qualification Required for Para Teacher


PARA TEACHER IS EQUIVALENT TO SHIKSHA MITRA, SHIKSHA SAHAYAK, SHIKSHA BANDHU, VIDHYARTHEE MITRA ETC.


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A.  No. 40 of 2014 Prakash Mandal
... 
Appellant
Vs.
State of
Jharkhand & Ors.
...
Respondents
----
CORAM :
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA
----
For the Appellant : Mr.  Bhanu Kumar, Advocate For the  Respondents :  J.C. to A.G......
Order No.07 Dated 16th July, 2014
This  Letters  Patent  Appeal  is  preferred  against  the  order  dated  12.11.2013 passed in W.P.(S) No.7680 of 2012, whereby the writ petition of  the  appellant,  seeking  for  direction  for  appointment as Para  Teacher was dismissed.
2.The  case  of  the  appellant  is  that  the  appellant  had  applied  for  selection  on  the  post  of  Para  Teacher  in  the  Upgraded  Primary  School,  Benagoria on 28.2.2012 along with all certificates. Pursuant to the letter  no.188   dated   22.2.2012   issued   by   the   District   Superintendent   of  Education, Jamtara, a General Body meeting (AAM  SABHA)
was held on  29.2.2012   under   the   Chairmanship   of   Shri   Kalipada   Hembrom   for
selection of Para Teacher in  Upgraded Primary School, Benagoria. For the post of Para Teacher, total nine applicants had applied and out of which the appellant was selected and recommended. Initially one Kumari Mithu Rani  Mandal  was to  be selected  but  due  to  her  unwillingness  for  being
appointed as Para Teacher, the appellant was selected. When the Village Education   Committee   recommended   the   name   of   the   appellant   for approval  on  1.8.2012,  the  appellant’s  name  was  not  approved  by  the Block  Education  Committee.  The  appellant also
made  representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara requesting for his selection for
the  post  of  Para  Teacher.  When  no  action  was  taken,  the  appellant  filed W.P.(S) No. 7680 of 2012 for his appointment to the post of Para Teacher. During  the  pendency  of  t
he  writ  petition,  the  Deputy  Commissioner, Jamtara  vide  order  dated  6.9.2012  rejected  the  representation  of  the appellant,  on  the  ground  that  there  was  over -
writing  on  the  proceeding register of Village Education Committee and also in view of the fact that
the  procedure  for  appointment  of  Para  Teacher  has  been  changed.
This fact  was  brought  on  record  by  way  of  filing  one I.A.  and  also  challenged
the  order  dated  06.09.2012.
The  writ  petition was  finally dismissed on 12.11.2013 observing that the documents relied upon by the appellant is doubtful.  It  was  further  observed  that  for  appointment  as  Para  Teacher,
there is requirement for passing Teacher Eligibility Test, which obviously the appellant has not passed.
3.Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition, the appellant has filed this Letters Patent Appeal.
The learned counsel for the appellant submitted  that  the  learned  Single  Judge  failed  to  appreciate  that  the selection of the appellant on the post of Para Teacher was made by duly
constituted   Village   Education   Committee   in   its   meeting   held   on 29.02.2012 and the said meeting was held in a transparent manner. It is further   submitted   that   in   the   said   meeting   of   Village   Education Committee  one  lady  candidate  Kumari  Mithu  Rani  Mandal  and  the
appellant was  finally  selected  and  only  due  to  the  unwillingness  of  the lady candidate Kumari Mithu Rani Mandal, the name of the appellant was finally  recommended.  The  learned  counsel  further  submitted  that  the appellant possesses higher educational qualification of M.A./M.Sc., B.Ed.
and  on  that  basis  his  name  was  recommended  by  the  Village  Education  Committee  and  while  so  the  learned  Single  ought  to  have  quashed  the order  dated  06.09.2012
passed  by  the  Deputy  Commissioner,  Jamtara rejecting the representation of the appellant.
4.The   learned   counsel   for   the   respondent - State   of   Jharkhand   has
submitted that even though the Village Education Committee was alleged to  have
recommended the name of the appellant on 29.02.2012, the same was forwarded by the Village Education Committee only on 01.08.2012 which was received in the office of the Block Education Committee only on 02.08.2012.
It  is further  submitted  that  in  the  meanwhile  the  Ministry  of  Human Resource   Development   Department   of   School   Education   and   Literacy, Government of India has issued a letter contained in D.O.No. 3-3/2012-EE-4 dated  07.05.2012  making  it  clear  that  only  those  persons  who  passed  the Teacher  Eligibility  Test  may  be  appointed  as  teachers  for  Class  I  to  VIII
including  contractual/para  teachers.  It  was  submitted  that  pursuant  to the  said  notification,  the  Human  Resource  Development  Department,  State  of  Jharkhand  has  also  issued  letter  No.JEPC/SSA/12/102/2010/1253  dated 25.06.2012 making it crystal clear that the selection of
Para Teacher shall be pursuant to provisions of R.T.E. Act, 2009 and the applicant for Para Teacher
must have passed Teacher Eligibility Test. It is further submitted that since the recommendation of the appellant was forwarded for approval to the Block Education Committee, Nala on ly on 02.08.2012 and the appellant having not passed  Teacher  Eligibility  Test ,  the  selection  of  the  appellant  was  not approved and the learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition.
5.Even  though  the  Village  Education  Committee  has  recommended thename of the appellant on 29.02.2012, the same was forwarded for approval to Block  Education  Committee  only  on  01
.08.2012.  In  the  meanwhile,  the Ministry  of  Human  Resource  Development  Department  of  School  Education and Literacy, Government of India vide letter contained in D.O. No.3-
3/2012-EE-4 dated 07.05.2012 made it clear that recruitment of teachers including contractual/para teachers, who have not qualified the TET would violate the provisions  under  the  Right  of  Children  of  Free  and  Compulsory  Education (RTE)  Act,  2009.  It  was  also  clarified  that  it  is
a binding  and  mandatory requirement  under the RTE Act  that  only  those  persons  who  pass  the  TET may be appointed as teachers for Classes I to VIII. It was also mentioned in the  said  letter  that  every  State  is  statutorily  required  to  comply  with  this requirement and violation
of it may not stand the test of law. It also appears that  in furtherance  of  the  direction  of  Government  of  India,  the  Principal Secretary,  Human  Resources  Development  Department
-cum-State  Project Director,  Jharkhand  State  Education  Project  Council,  Ranchi  issued  letter
No.JEPC/SSA/12/102/2010/1253  dated  25.06.2012  making  it  clear  that selection  of
Para  Teacher shall  be  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  RTE  Act, 2009  and  the  applicant  must
have  passed  Teacher  Eligibility  Test .  Even though the appellant is said to have higher qualification, since the appellant has   not   passed   the   Teacher   Eligibility   Test,
which   is   the   mandatory requirement,  the  recommendation  of  the  Village  Education  Committe
e  was not  approved  by  the  Block  Education  Committee.  In  view  of  the  mandatory
requirement of passing TET as per the notification issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of India (07.05.20
12) and the subsequent notification issued by the  State  of  Jharkhand  (25.06.2012),  the  appellant  cannot  seek  for  a direction  upon  the  respondents  to  consider  him  for  appointment  as  para
teacher.
6. We do not find any  reason warranting interference in the order of the learned  Single  Judge  and  this  Letters  Patent  Appeal  is  dismissed.
If  the appellant has subsequently qualified in Teacher Eligibility Test, the appellant is  at  liberty  to  participate  in  the  subsequent  selection,  if  any,  either  as  a regular teacher or Para Teacher.
(R. Banumathi, C.J.)
(Amitav K. Gupta, J.)
Birendra/Brajesh



 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - शिक्षामित्रों के बिना टीईटी समायोजन का विरोध सुप्रीम कोर्ट में करने की तैयारी -

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - शिक्षामित्रों के बिना टीईटी समायोजन का विरोध सुप्रीम कोर्ट में करने की तैयारी - 

Ganesh Dixhit >>>>>>>

साथियों,
रोजगारपूर्ण सुगम जीवन स्थापत्य के प्रयासों की गति शासकीय शिथिलता और अकर्मण्यता और अदालती सुस्ती के कारण विधिक समर्थन और पूर्ण योग्य युवा अपने जीवन के सबसे महत्त्वपूर्ण और कीमती काल में जोशहीन होकर ऊहापोह में फँस घर में बैठ भाग्य के सहारे भविष्य की चिंता में अपनी योग्यता की व्यर्थ आज़माइश में लगे हुए हैं,ऐसी दुर्दिन परिस्थति में कुछ विशेष बिंदु निम्न हैं -
1- sc में हमारे केस की सुनवाई की तारीख अभी निश्चित नहीँ हुई है,जिसकी पूरी सम्भावना जुलाई में होने की बन रही है,हमारी टीम सुप्रीम कोर्ट में तत्पर है !
2- 3 मई को abvp ऑफीस केसरबाग लखनऊ में सभी चयनित और अच्य्नित अभ्यर्थियों की प्रादेशिक मीटिंग आहूत की गयी है,सभी साथियों की उपस्थिति अनिवार्य है !
मित्रों,शिक्षामित्रों से हमें एक चीज़ सीखनी होगी की उन्होंने बिल्कुल अवैध और हर वर्ग के विरोध के बावजूद अपने अनिर्णित दूरस्थ प्रशिक्षण को मान्य करवा अपने संगठन की शक्ति के बल पर समायोजन करवा लिया आगे चाहे जो हो !
वहीँ हमारे टीईटी 2011 के साथी खुद को भ्रमवश ज्ञानी मान अकर्मण्य बन बैठै है,अगर हमें पूर्ण समायोजन करवाना है तो लगना पड़ेगा ! हाइ कोर्ट की हिलाहवाली के चलते शिक्षामित्रों के बिना टीईटी समायोजन का विरोध सुप्रीम कोर्ट में करने की तैयारी है,हमारी टीम अग्रसर है ! हमें हर हाल में शिक्षामित्रों के अवैध समायोजन को रोकना होगा तभी टीईटी 2011 का समायोजन सम्भव है !
वहीँ बॉर्डरलाईन के साथी 5 मई को scert घेराव को पहुंचे,तभी दवाब बना माँग मनवा सकेंगे !
चयनित साथियों से यही कहूँगा की कामचोरी और अकर्मण्यता छोड़ कल हर जिले में bsa और dm को अपनी खस्ता माली हालात बताते हुए मानदेय शीघ्र देने का ज्ञापन दें
अन्यथा यूँ ही स्कूल में पढ़ा बेगारी पर 2017 तक अपने घरवालों के पैसे मंगाते रहें,फैसला आपका !
कल के ज्ञापन कार्यक्रम की फोटो fb पर अवश्य डालें !
फ़ेसबुकिये या व्हाट्स एप्प से नेतागिरी करने वाले नेताओ से अपील है की ज़मीन पर काम करके दिखाये वरना चयनित लोगों का नौकरी पा लेने की ख़ुशी जल्द ही लाचार बेरोज़गारी में बदली दिखेगी,अगर सरकारी नौकरी करनी है तो संगठन बना सरकार पर दवाब से ही अपने काम करवाने होंगे अन्यथा दिनो के काम सालों में करेंगे !
आपस में लड़ाई बन्द कर एकसाथ सरकारी तंत्र पर हमला करें,योग्य लोगों के साथ अन्याय क्यों ?
हम सबकी लड़ाई सरकारी भ्रष्ट और पक्षपाती तंत्र से है ! सो अभी नहीँ कभी नहीँ,निकलना होगा,एक साथ हमला करना होगा !
अगर कुछ हुनर है तो दिखाओ,मोहताज नहीँ करमवीर हो,दिखाओ !
हमारा ह्क हमें लेना आता है,कायर न समझे हम पढ़े- लिखो को कोई !
हम सत्य और न्याय के पथ पर हैं,ईश्वर साथी है,विजय साक्षी है,शेष कल के ज्ञापन के बाद...
सन्घेय शक्ति सर्वदा !
जय हिन्द जय टीईटी !!

 UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  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 / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Read more...