/* remove this */

Thursday, July 12, 2012

UPTET : टी.ई.टी. अभ्यर्थियों द्वारा लखनऊ में ऐतिहासिक आन्दोलन


टी..टी. अभ्यर्थियों द्वारा लखनऊ में ऐतिहासिक आन्दोलन
************************************************************************************
Appeal from BLOG EDITOR : - Make your movement under law of land. Gandhigiri is a good option. 
*******************************************************************************
Below Information compiled by Mr. Shyam Dev Mishra.
***********************************************************************


(लखनऊ से मनोज कुमार सिंह "मयंक जी (वाराणसी), धर्मेन्द्र जी (उन्नाव), विक्रम यादव जी (इटावा), सारिका श्रीवास्तव जी (उन्नाव) तथा मीडिया से मिली जानकारी के आधार पर)

अभी अभी लगभग १०:४० बजे रात मनोज कुमार सिंह 

मयंक जी का सभी आन्दोलनकारियों  से निवेदन है सभी लोग किसी तरह आज रात चारबाग़ पर एकत्र हों जहाँ आगे की रणनीति बनाई जाएगी जिसमे उन्होंने 

स्वयं आमरण अनशन करने का प्रस्ताव किया है.



प्रदेश में ७२८२५ प्रशिक्षु अध्यापकों की टी..टी. मेरिट के आधार पर चयन के लिए दिसंबर २०११ में शुरू की गई भर्ती-प्रक्रिया पर, पिछले महीनो से कभी सरकारी स्तर पर विज्ञापन-प्रकाशन में हुई तकनीकी खामी, कभी उच्चपदासीन अधिकारियों द्वारा धन लेकर परिणामों में हेराफेरी करने के आरोप, कभी  शासन-प्रशासन में इस मुद्दे पर व्याप्त असमंजस-निष्क्रियता दिशाभ्रम  की स्थिति  तो  कभी  राजनैतिक विद्वेष  की भावना से  हर मौके पर रुख  बदलती  सरकार  के दोमुंहे  रवैये और  कभी किन्ही  निहित  स्वार्थों की पूर्ति के लिए चयन के आधार में परिवर्तन के अनैतिक-अवैधानिक-अन्यायपूर्ण दुराग्रह  के कारण जो ग्रहण लगा हैउसने आख़िरकार प्रदेश के लाखों  शिक्षित बेरोजगारों के  सब्र का बांध तोड़ दिया  हैनतीज़तन सरकार के निर्णय और मंशा से  आक्रोशित  अभ्यर्थियों  ने   लखनऊ में भीषण आन्दोलन  की जो रुपरेखा बनाई थी, वह सिर्फ पूरी तरह से सफल रही है बल्कि इसने सरकार और प्रशासन को  भी  रक्षात्मक  स्थिति में आने को मजबूर कर दिया है.

पेश है लखनऊ में आज दिनांक १२.०७.२०१२ को हुए ऐतिहासिक आन्दोलन की चंद सुर्खियाँ:

  • राजधानी लखनऊ में टी..टी. समर्थकों का अभूतपूर्व एवं ऐतिहासिक आन्दोलन
  • विधानसभा की और जाने वाले हर मार्ग पर हुए चक्काजाम ने थामी शहर की रफ़्तार
  • विधान सभा की और जाने वाले मार्गो पर जाने दिया गया एक भी वाहन
  • प्रदेश के हर जिले से भरी संख्या में दल-बल समेत राजधानी आये  है अभ्यर्थी
  • भारी तादाद में युवतियों और महिलाओं की भी सक्रिय भागीदारी
  • वाराणसी से दिल्ली तक की पदयात्रा करनेवाले मनोज कुमार "मयंक" भी डटे मोर्चे पे
  • आन्दोलनकारियों से पटी राजधानी की सड़कें, प्रशासन के हाथ-पाँव फूले
  • आर-पार की लड़ाई का ऐलान, निर्णय  होने तक डाले रहेंगे सडकों पर डेरा 
  • भरी संख्या में अभ्यर्थियों ने किया दिनभर अहिंसक प्रदर्शन  नारेबाजी
  • प्रशासन के आश्वासनों से माननेदबनेझुकने से किया सीधा इनकार
  • सरकार की और से आज़म खान के बातचीत के प्रस्ताव को मारी ठोकर 
  • मुख्यमंत्री द्वारा निर्णय की सार्वजनिक घोषणा तक जारी रहेगा आन्दोलन
  • आन्दोलन के समर्थन में प्रदेश के कोने-कोने से अभ्यर्थियों का आना जारी
  • नेताओं ने आख़िरी लड़ाई में हर एक अभ्यर्थी से किया लखनऊ आने का आह्वान
  • अहिंसक पर प्रभावी आन्दोलन से पुलिस-पी..सी. दिनभर बने रहे मूकदर्शक
  • पूर्वप्रकाशित विज्ञप्ति के अनुसार टी..टी. मेरिट से चयन और नियुक्ति की मांग
  • नियमों की अनदेखी कर प्रदेश के शैक्षणिक ढांचे पर प्रहार पर भारी रोष
  • क़ानूनी और नीतिगत तौर पर प्रत्यक्षतः कमजोर पडी सरकार पडी है निरुत्तर
  • गुटबंदी की अफवाहों से आन्दोलन कमजोर करने की साजिश का पर्दाफाश
  • सारे नेता-अभ्यर्थी बिना किसी मतभेद के पूरी तरह एकमत-एकजुट और उत्साहित
  • स्थानीय प्रदेश स्तर पर आन्दोलन को मिली जबरदस्त मीडिया कवरेज
  • देर शाम अभ्यर्थियों को गिरफ्तार करने की कोशिशे एकजुटता के आगे नाकाम
  • सड़क को ही जेल और पुलिस की कतार को ही चहारदीवारी मान डट गए अभ्यर्थी
  • 8 बजे चौराहे खली करने के अल्टीमेटम को आन्दोलनकारियों ने सिरे से दिया नकार
  • निर्णय  होने की स्थिति में आमरण-अनशन पर बैठने को आमादा युवक-युवतियां
  • नेता पा रहे हैं खुद को जीत के नजदीक, पर साथ माँगा प्रदेश भर के टी..टी. अभ्यर्थियों का
  • संख्याबल कम हो जाने की स्थिति में प्रशासन के हावी होने की आशंका से चिंतित
  • आन्दोलन की मजबूती और अपने लक्ष्य की प्राप्ति के लिए हर अभ्यर्थी का लखनऊ में किया आह्वान

हाल की खबर (रात 9 बजे):

  • आन्दोलनकारियों के आगे बेबस पड़े प्रशासन ने आस-पास के जिलों से मंगवाई अतिरिक्त फ़ोर्स
  • शांत आन्दोलनकारियों पर भरी संख्या में पुलिस-पी..सी. के जरिये सरकारी दमनचक्र शुरू
  • चौराहे पे डटे अभ्यर्थियों पर बिना चेतावनी के अचानक बरसानी शुरू कर दी गई लाठियां
  • महिलाओं तक को बर्बरतापूर्वक लाठीचार्ज से नहीं हिचकी पुलिस-पी..सी. के जवान
  • आन्दोलनकारियों की हुंकारहौसला तोड़ पाने में अब भी नाकाम रहेगी सरकार
  • बर्बरतापूर्ण जुल्मोसितम के बावजूद झुकने और मैदान छोड़ने से आन्दोलनकारियों का इनकार
  • तितर-बितर होने की सम्भावना के मद्देनज़र पहले से बन चुकी  है आगे की रणनीति
  • फिर से इकट्ठे होकर इस आन्दोलन को जारी रखने को कृतसंकल्प, नहीं छोड़ेंगे लखनऊ
  • सैकड़ों की संख्या में अभ्यर्थी बुरी तरह घायल-चुटहिल


अब तक के आंदोलनों की तुलना में इस बार "अभी नहीं तो कभी नहीं" वाली स्थिति की गंभीरता को समझते हुए भारी संख्या में आज अभ्यर्थी लखनऊ में संगठित हुए है और इसका सकारात्मक परिणाम भी देखने को मिला है. अब चूंकि इस भर्ती-प्रक्रिया का काफी हद तक दारोमदार अब कोर्ट में सरकार के रुख पर निर्भर करता है, टी..टी. अभ्यर्थी इसे अपने लिए आखिरी अवसर मान रहे है जिसके जरिये  वो   अगस्त की सुनवाई के पूर्व ही सरकार को पूर्व-प्रकाशित विज्ञप्ति और पूर्व-निर्धारित नियमों के आधार पर भर्ती के लिए मजबूर कर सकते हैं. और वास्तविकता भी यही है कि बिना किसी अपराध के पिछले ६ माह से मानसिक यंत्रणा और अवसाद झेल रहे अभ्यर्थियों को अपने वाजिब हक़ के लिए भी इस लोकतान्त्रिक देश में सरेआम लाठियां झेलनी पड़ रही हैं.

उन सभी भाई-बहनों से, जो किसी कारणवश आज चाहकर भी लखनऊ नहीं पहुच पाए, अपील है कि संघर्ष की इस घड़ी में आपके हक़ के लिए भूखे-प्यासे सड़कों पर लड़ रहे, मार तक खा रहे और अत्याचार झेल रहे अपने साथियों की मदद के लिए उनका साथ देने के लिए, भरी संख्या में लखनऊ पहुचकर सत्ता पे काबिज गूंगे-बहरों को दिखा दे की इस देश का तंत्र (व्यवस्था) लोक (जनता) से ही चलता है तभी लोकतंत्र कहलाता है.

और जो भाई-बहन जानबूझ कर लखनऊ के आन्दोलन में शामिल नहीं हुए और सिर्फ घर बैठ कर ज़ुबानी जमा-खर्च कर नौकरी पाने की आस लगाये है तो उन्हें नौकरी भले मिल जाये, उनकी खुद की निगाहों में वे इस देश की जयचंदों-मीर जाफरों की पीढी के ध्वजवाहक माने जायेंगे.

महत्वपूर्ण सूचना:

अभी अभी लगभग १०:४० बजे रात मनोज कुमार सिंह मयंक जी का सभी आन्दोलनकारियों  से निवेदन है सभी लोग किसी तरह आज रात चारबाग़ पर एकत्र हों जहाँ आगे की रणनीति बनाई जाएगी जिसमे उन्होंने स्वयं आमरण अनशन करने का प्रस्ताव किया है.

आपका
श्याम देव मिश्रा
मुंबई



Read more...

UPTET : यूपी के शिक्षक बेरोजगारों ने ठप किया विधान सभा मार्ग

UPTET : यूपी के शिक्षक बेरोजगारों ने ठप किया विधान सभा मार्ग


लखनऊ। टीईटी परीक्षा उत्‍तीर्ण करने के बावजूद पिछले छह महीने से नौकरी के लिए संघर्ष कर रहे शिक्षक बेरोजगारों ने उत्‍तर प्रदेश सरकार  के खिलाफ आरपार की लड़ाई का ऐलान कर दिया है। प्रदेश सरकार की नीति स्‍पष्‍ट न होने के कारण गुरूवार को प्रदेश भर के टीईटी बेरोजगारों ने लखनऊ पहुंचकर जमकर बवाल मचाया। हजारों की संख्‍या में मौजूद आंदोलनकारियों ने चारबाग स्‍टेशन से सीधे विधान सभा कूच कर दिया। इसके बाद समूचा विधान सभा मार्ग ठप हो गया। यहीं पर आंदोलनकारियों ने जुमे की नवाज भी अता की। आंदोलनकारियों के तेवरों को देखते हुए समूचा मार्ग छावनी में तब्‍दील हो गया है। हालांकि दोपहर तक युवाओं ने विधानसभा मार्ग से हटने से साफ इंकार कर दिया








टीईटी आंदोलन को लेकर बेरोजगार शिक्षकों के तेवर लगातार उग्र होते जा रहे हैं। गुरूवार सुबह लगभग 11 बजे हुसैनगंज विधान सभा मार्ग पर एकत्र होकर रास्‍ता जाम कर दिया। देखते ही देखते राजधानी का सबसे व्‍यस्‍त मार्ग ठहर सा गयानौकरी न मिलने से गुस्‍साए बेरोजगारों ने बुधवार को प्रशासन की रणनीति को ठेंगा दिखाकर विधान सभा तक प्रदर्शन किया। आंदोलनकारियों में उत्‍साह इस कदर था कि उन्‍होंने महाराणा प्रताप की प्रतिमा पर तिरंगा फहराया जबकि जाम में फंसे लोगों के वाहनों की छत पर चढ़कर नारेबाजी की। इसके बाद पुलिस से युवाओं की नोंकझोंक भी हुई





स्थि‍ति को देखते हुए पूरा क्षेत्र ही पुलिस छावनी में तब्‍दील हो गया। पुलिस के लठियाने के बाद आंदोलनकारी बर्लिंगटन चौराहे पहुंच गए। यहां पर उन्‍होंने विधायकों को भी घेरने का प्रयास किया। आंदोलनकारियों का कहना था कि वह सरकार की टीइटी प्रक्रिया रद्द करने की मंशा पूरी नहीं होने देंगे। आंदोलनकारी बेरोजगार सर्वेश राठौर ने चेतावनी दी कि जब तक नौकरी नहीं मिलेगी तब तक आंदोलन जारी रहेगा



गौरतलब है कि टीईटी से जुड़ी सभी पत्रावलियां शासन से तलब की गई हैं। टीईटी प्रक्रिया का विज्ञापन करते समय बेसिक शिक्षा नियमावली के सेक्‍शन 14 का उल्‍लंघन, टीईटी परीक्षा का आयोजन एनसीटीई के नोटिफिकेशन के दो वर्षो बाद क्‍यों हुआ। ऐसे कई सवाल हैं जिनके जवाब तलाशे जा रहे हैं। गौरतलब है कि सवा दो लाख आवेदकों ने लिखित परीक्षा दी। जबकि 72 हजार से ज्‍यादा आवेदकों का चयन होना है। ऐसे में अब भर्ती प्रक्रिया निरस्‍त होने के बाद छात्र आक्रोशित हैं और नई सरकार से राहत की उम्‍मीद लगाए हैं। हालांकि बीते कई   दौर के प्रदर्शन और लाठीचार्ज के बाद गुरूवार को आक्रोश फट पड़ा


News Source : http://yuvadastak.com/new/?p=3855
***********************************
Blog Editor View about this NEWS -
When I read last paragraph of this NEWS, I found -
ऐसे में अब भर्ती प्रक्रिया निरस्‍त होने के बाद छात्र आक्रोशित हैं और नई सरकार से राहत की उम्‍मीद लगाए हैं"

I want to say matter is still in Court, And Final decision is awaited , Recruitment process is NOT Cancelled.
News should be carefully published.


However I like coverage of this NEWS as it contains many pics with proper timings.Really taking interst in problems of TETians. It shows anger of Unemployed TETians and seriousness of TET matter.

As per my belief - Selection should be based on TET merit, And  one more examination can be furthur conducted to judge performance/review. And if candidates are unable to clear it then one another chance can be given just like improvement (Like - A procedure in TET Examination for improvement), If they again failed then they should make out from selection.
However Government having specialist who are investigating this matter and decision is based on their investigation OR in the hands of Highcourt.
Read more...

UPTET : आजम ने दिया टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों की मांग पूरी करने का आश्वासन

UPTET : आजम ने दिया टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों की मांग पूरी करने का आश्वासन


लखनऊ| उत्तर प्रदेश के नगर विकास मंत्री आजम खान ने गुरुवार को राजधानी लखनऊ में अपनी मांगों को लेकर प्रदर्शन कर रहे शिक्षक पात्रता परीक्षा (टीईटी) उत्तीर्ण करने वाले अभ्यर्थियों से मुलाकात कर उनकी मांगों को पूरा करने का आश्वासन दिया

राजधानी लखनऊ में विधानसभा के पास सुबह करीब 11 बजे के आसपास टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों ने अपनी मांगों को लेकर प्रदर्शन शुरू किया। अभ्यर्थियों की मांग है कि सरकार उन लोगों पर जल्द से जल्द कोई फैसला ले। प्रदर्शन में हजारों अभ्यर्थी शामिल हुए

मामले की गम्भीरता को देखते हुए नगर विकास मंत्री आजम खान स्वयं विधानसभा के सामने प्रदर्शनकारियों से मिलने पहुंचे। प्रदर्शनकारियों से बातचीत करने के दौरान उन्होंने आश्वासन दिया कि सरकार के साथ उनकी बातचीत का रास्ता खुला है और जल्द ही इस मामले में किसी निर्णय पर पहुंचा जाएगा। प्रदर्शन को देखते हुए विधानसभा और उसके आसपास पुलिस बल की भारी तैनाती की गयी थी


News Source : http://hindi.pardaphash.com/news/--709423/709423.html
*********************************
As per NEWS matter is SERIOUS, And TET Candidates worried for their FUTURE.
Govt. stand still NOT clear and matter is UNDER investigation as per earlier NEWS.


Many candidates suggests - Exclude culprits/ convicted candidates and process should start.


View of Blog Editor - Selection should be based on TET merit, And  one more examination can be furthur conducted to judge performance/review. And if candidates are unable to clear it then one another chance can be given just like improvement (Like - A procedure in TET Examination for improvement), If they again failed then they should make out from selection.
However Government having specialist who are investigating this matter and decision is based on their investigation OR in the hands of Highcourt.


But, If process changed then entire matter can be halted as matter can go upto Supreme Court.
Read more...

UPTET - Chalo Lucknow 12-7-12 by Mr. Rashid Azad


UPTET - Chalo Lucknow 12-7-12 by Mr. Rashid Azad 


From: rashid azad <rashid.khurshid@gmail.com>
Date: 2012/7/11
Subject: CHALO LUCKNOW 12-7-2012.
To: Sarkari Damad <sarkaridamad007@gmail.com>, Muskan Bharat <muskan24by7@gmail.com>, dev02019654@gmail.com, nnitinmehta1982 <nnitinmehta1982@rediffmail.com>, rajesh rao <rajeshrow86@gmail.com>, Naved Ahmed <navedahmeds@gmail.com>, Shyam Dev Mishra <shyamdevmishra@gmail.com>, DHARM CHAND <dharmchand1980@gmail.com>


MAM,

PLZ DISPLAY THIS IMPORTANT & URGENT NEWS...

HUM NAHI CHIN WAYEGE APNA HAQ.....................

MERE SABHI MUSLIM BHAIYO DEKHA DO IS SARKAR KO, JO KI APNE KO MUSALMANO

KA HUMDARD KEHTI HAI, HUM 20000 TET PASS HAI,JIN KI ROZI-ROTI SE YEH

SARKAR KHEL RAHI HAI.

TO DOSTO AAP SABHI SE GUZARISH HAI KI AAP 12-7-2012 KOAAP AAPNE PEHNAWE  ME AAYE, SAFAID KURTA-PAJAMA SAR PE TOPI JAISE KI PHOTO ME , JIS SE HUM SABHI TETAINS(2.70 LAKH) KA FAIDA HO,SATH HI MEDIA K DUWARA SARE DESH KO PATA CHALE,KI YEH SARKAR HUMHARI HUMDARD HAI YA BE-DARD........




EK BAAT OR MERE SABHI TETIANS SAHIYO(2.70 LAKH) HUM SAB EK HAI......HINDU-MUSLIM-SIKH-ISAAYI.

KOI BHI SATHI ISE GALAT BHAWNA SE NA SAMJHE ......

HUM TETIANS NE KYA NAHI KIYA-DHARNA KIYA,LATHI KHAI,BHIKH MANGI,GARMI ME THANDA PANI PILAYA,VARANASI-DELHI TAK PATH-YATRA KI, EK KAM YEH BHI KAR K DEKHLE.....


Rashid ji, Aapkee baton ko dhyan mein rakhte hue aapa content as it is published kar deeya hai.

Note : Democracy mein logo ke apne views hote /ho sakte hain. Aur ve apne haq ke leeye maang kar sakte hain.
~ Blog Editor
************************************

Blog Editor View : -
UPTET matter is running in Allahabad High court. And in recently - change of selection base comes in news.
Muslim candidates having fear that most of them got educations form UP Board and they are getting less marks in comparison to CBSE/ICSE Board.


Recently a news comes that for selection in IIT : -


UP Board cutoff 65% = CBSE Board Cutoff  78%
***************
Another fear in Candidate's mind is that - If base for selection is changed at the last stage of process than entire process may halted and matter may go in Supreme Court and it may create another delay in selection for years.


Therefore demand for selection through TET merit increases.
**********
Additionally a poll is conducted on this BLOG for base of selection, And its results are -

टीईटी अंक  : -    4486 (64%)
एकेडेमिक अंक : -  1018 (14%)
 टीईटी + एकेडेमिक अंक  : -   1379 (19%)
कोई राय नही :-   53 (0%)


अब तक के वोट: 6936 
पोल बंद कर दिया गया है 
*********************************************
Read more...

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

UPTET : 12 को लखनऊ में होगा ऐतिहासिक आंदोलन

UPTET : 12 को लखनऊ में होगा ऐतिहासिक आंदोलन

प्रेषक: Saif Lari <mohd.saif.lari@gmail.com>
दिनांक: 9 जुलाई 2012 4:03 pm
विषय: 12 को लखनऊ में होगा ऐतिहासिक आंदोलन ।
प्रति: Muskan Bharat <muskan24by7@gmail.com>


UPTET : 12 को लखनऊ में होगा ऐतिहासिक आंदोलन ।



पडरौना/कुशीनगर (ब्यूरो)। टी.ई.टी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों ने रविवार को पडरौना स्थित जूनियर हाईस्कूल परिसर में टी.ई.टी उत्तीर्ण संघर्ष मोर्चा की बैठक आयोजित की ।
बैठक कि अध्यक्षता करते हुए जिलाध्यक्ष अखिलेश मिश्र ने कहा कि शासन उनके साथ सौतेला व्यवहार कर रहा है । सभी टीईटी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों को १२ जुलाई को लखनऊ पहुँच कर ज़ोरदार आंदोलन करना होगा । श्री मिश्र ने आगे कहा कि 12 जुलाई का दिन टी.ई.टी अभ्यर्थियों के लिया करो या मारो का दिन होगा और उस दिन से अनिश्चित कालीन अनशन और उग्र आंदोलन होगा जिसकी सारी जिम्मेदारी शासन व प्रशासन कि होगी ।
इस दौरान उपाध्यक्ष मुहम्मद सैफ लारी ने प्रदेश के सभी टी.ई.टी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों से निवेदन किया कि एकता का परिचय देते हुए 12 जुलाई को लाखों कि संख्या में लखनऊ पहुँच कर आंदोलन को ऐतिहासिक बनाएँ । उन्होंने प्रदेश के मुख्यमंत्री अखिलेश यादव पर राजनीतिक बदले कि भावना से काम करने का आरोप लगाया और कहा कि टी.ई.टी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों के साथ किये जा रहे सौतेला व्यवहार कि बड़ी कीमत उ० प्र० सरकार को निकट भविष्य में चुकानी पड़ेगी ।  
बैठक को जिला संयोजक अनूप श्रीवास्तव, महासचिव राहुल कुमार सिंह,  महामंत्री छोटेलाल, कोषाध्यक्ष कृष्णानन्द चौहान, प्रेमनाथ मिश्र, सत्येन्द्र सिंह आदि ने भी संबोधित किया ।
इस दौरान राजेश पांडेय, विजय कुमार, राजेन्द्र यादव, सुमंत पाडेय, दयानन्द शर्मा, धर्मेद्र यादव, श्वेता मिश्र, निशा गुप्ता, ज्योति जायसवाल, संतोष कुमार, राम परीक्षा प्रजापति, रत्‍‌नेश कुमार शर्मा, इस्तियाक अहमद, शिव शंकर त्रिपाठी, मृत्युंजय कुमार, सचिदान्नद सिंह, राजेश प्रसाद, सत्येन्द्र कुमार, शम्भू नाथ चौहान, उदयभान यादव, महेश सिंह, कमलेश कुमार सिंह, दिनेश कुमार यादव, विनोद कुमार शर्मा आदि मौजूद रहे।


Read more...

UPTET : गोरखपुर टीईटी संघर्ष मोर्चा लखनऊ में 12 से छेड़ेगा आंदोलन

UPTET : गोरखपुर टीईटी संघर्ष मोर्चा लखनऊ में 12 से छेड़ेगा आंदोलन





























---------- अग्रेषित संदेश ----------
प्रेषक: Subhan Allah <subhanallah2007@gmail.com>
दिनांक: 10 जुलाई 2012 4:42 pm
विषय: गोरखपुर टीईटी संघर्ष मोर्चा लखनऊ में 12 से छेड़ेगा आंदोलन
प्रति: Muskan Bharat <muskan24by7@gmail.com>


UPTET : गोरखपुर टीईटी संघर्ष मोर्चा लखनऊ में 12 से छेड़ेगा आंदोलन


गोरखपुर । गोरखपुर के टीईटी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थी ११ जुलाई को कृषक एक्सप्रेस से रात १० बजे लखनऊ के लिए निकलेंगे. सभी से अनुरोध है अधिक से अधिक संख्या में लोगों के साथ इस आखरी मौके को भुनाने के liye अपने घरों को छोड़कर लखनऊ चलें. संघर्ष मोर्चा की रविवार को पन्त पार्क में हुई बैठक में शैक्षिक योग्यता के आधार शिक्षकों की चयन व्यवस्था पर नाराजगी जताई गई। बैठक में सरकार के फैसले को न्यायालय की अवमानना करार दिया गया। मोर्चा ने टीईटी की मैरिट के आधार पर शिक्षकों का चयन न कराए जाने पर 12 जुलाई से लखनऊ में आंदोलन करने का निर्णय लिया गया

बैठक की अध्यक्षता करते हुए नवीन श्रीवास्तव ने कहा की सरकार ने शैक्षिक योग्यता के आधार पर शिक्षकों के चयन की बात कही है, जो सरासर गलत है। इस मामले को कोर्ट पहले ही रद्द कर चुका है। कोर्ट ने साफ कहा था कि एनसीटीई का उल्लंघन शिक्षक चयन में कतई नहीं किया जा सकता है।

उन्होंने कहा कि शिक्षकों का चयन टीईटी की मैरिट के आधार पर ही किया जाना चाहिए। उन्होंने आरोप लगाया राज्य सरकार शिक्षक भर्ती चयन प्रक्रिया शुरू करने को लेकर कतई गंभीर नहीं है। 12 जुलाई से लखनऊ में एक बार फिर प्रदेशव्यापी आंदोलन किया जाएगा। बैठक में आनंद, शिवम्, सुभानाल्लाह, मुर्तुजा हुसैन, सुरेश प्रसाद आदि लोगों ने सपा सरकार को दोहरी निति अपनाने के लिए आलोचना की.
वही दूसरी ओर कुछ अभ्यर्थियों ने टेट  मैरिट पर चयन न होंने की दशा में सामूहिक आत्मदाह करने की बात करके मीटिंग में एक अलग सा माहौल बना दिया. हम सब उनकी पीड़ा से अच्छी तरह वाकिफ हैं.




Read more...

UPTET - Chalo Lucknow 12-7-12

UPTET - Chalo Lucknow 12-7-12 by Mr. Rashid Azad 


From: rashid azad <rashid.khurshid@gmail.com>
Date: 2012/7/11
Subject: CHALO LUCKNOW 12-7-2012.
To: Sarkari Damad <sarkaridamad007@gmail.com>, Muskan Bharat <muskan24by7@gmail.com>, dev02019654@gmail.com, nnitinmehta1982 <nnitinmehta1982@rediffmail.com>, rajesh rao <rajeshrow86@gmail.com>, Naved Ahmed <navedahmeds@gmail.com>, Shyam Dev Mishra <shyamdevmishra@gmail.com>, DHARM CHAND <dharmchand1980@gmail.com>



MAM,
PLZ DISPLAY THIS IMPORTANT & URGENT NEWS...

HUM NAHI CHIN WAYEGE APNA HAQ.....................

MERE SABHI MUSLIM BHAIYO -
 SE GUZARISH HAI KI AAP 12-7-2012 KOAAP AAPNE PEHNAWE  ME AAYE, SAFAID KURTA-PAJAMA SAR PE TOPI JAISE KI PHOTO ME , JIS SE HUM SABHI TETAINS(2.70 LAKH) KA FAIDA HO,SATH HI MEDIA K DUWARA SARE DESH KO PATA CHALE,KI YEH SARKAR HUMHARI HUMDARD HAI YA BE-DARD........

EK BAAT OR MERE SABHI TETIANS SAHIYO(2.70 LAKH) HUM SAB EK HAI......HINDU-MUSLIM-SIKH-ISAAYI.

KOI BHI SATHI ISE GALAT BHAWNA SE NA SAMJHE ......

HUM TETIANS NE KYA NAHI KIYA-DHARNA KIYA,LATHI KHAI,BHIKH MANGI,GARMI ME THANDA PANI PILAYA,VARANASI-DELHI TAK PATH-YATRA KI, EK KAM YEH BHI KAR K DEKHLE.....


      Regards
Mohd Rashid Azad
























Note : Mujhe thodee se editing karnee padee, kyunkee mera blog - sarkaar ke oopar bevajhe iljaam nahin lagaan chahta. Mein aap logo kee bhavnaon ko samjhtee hoon aur chahtee hoon kee jeet niyamon va sachhaee kee ho.
Halanki democracy mein logo ke apne views hote /ho sakte hain. Aur ve apne haq ke leeye maang kar sakte hain. Mod. Rashid ji ke apne vichaar hain aur unhone apnee baaton ko logon ke samksh rakhaa hai.
Dhanywaad
~ Blog Editor
************************************

Blog Editor View : -
UPTET matter is running in Allahabad High court. And in recently - change of selection base comes in news.
Muslim candidates having fear that most of them got educations form UP Board and they are getting less marks in comparison to CBSE/ICSE Board.


Recently a news comes that for selection in IIT : -


UP Board cutoff 65% = CBSE Board Cutoff  78%
***************
Another fear in Candidate's mind is that - If base for selection is changed at the last stage of process than entire process may halted and matter may go in Supreme Court and it may create another delay in selection for years.


Therefore demand for selection through TET merit increases.
**********
Additionally a poll is conducted on this BLOG for base of selection, And its results are -

टीईटी अंक  : -    4486 (64%)
एकेडेमिक अंक : -  1018 (14%)
 टीईटी + एकेडेमिक अंक  : -   1379 (19%)
कोई राय नही :-   53 (0%)


अब तक के वोट: 6936 
पोल बंद कर दिया गया है 
*********************************************
Read more...

UPTET : टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों ने तय की आंदोलन की रणनीति


UPTET : टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों ने तय की आंदोलन की रणनीति

देवरिया : टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों ने रविवार को टाउनहाल परिसर में बैठक कर 12 जुलाई को लखनऊ में होने वाले आंदोलन की रणनीति तय की। अभ्यर्थियों ने प्रदेश सरकार से टीईटी में प्राप्त अंकों के मेरिट के आधार पर नियुक्ति करने की मांग की



























बैठक को संबोधित करते हुए टीईटी संघर्ष मोर्चा के महामंत्री रत्नेश त्रिपाठी ने कहा कि सरकार बदले के नीयत
से काम कर रही है। यही कारण है अभी तक नियुक्ति में इतना विलम्ब हो रहा है। अमिताभ मिश्र ने कहा कि शिक्षामित्रों को भ्रम में रखा जा रहा है। उन्होंने कहा कि जल्द ही मोर्चा की तरफ से शिक्षामित्रों के विरुद्ध एक विशेष अपील दायर की जाएगी, जिससे कि प्रशिक्षित बेरोजगारों को रोजगार मिल सके। प्रदेश संरक्षक गोरखनाथ सिंह ने निकाय चुनाव में नगर पालिका परिषद देवरिया की अध्यक्ष चुने जाने पर अलका सिंह को बधाई दी।

बैठक में प्रमुख रूप से अनुराग मल्ल, राजीव गुप्ता, मदन यादव, रूपेश मिश्र, राजेश त्रिपाठी, जगदीश कुमार यादव, लक्ष्मन पुण्डरीकाक्ष शर्मा, मनोज मिश्र, सतीश मिश्र आदि मौजूद थे।


News Source : http://www.jagran.com/uttar-pradesh/deoria-9448850.html / Jagran (8.7.12)
***************************************
TET Candidates are in fear due to uncertain future and its matter is still running in Allahabad Highcourt.

As per poll conducted on this BLOG about selection base for Primary Teacher Recruitment : 

टीईटी अंक (Process already decide) : -    4486 (64%)
एकेडेमिक अंक (Only Acad. Not suffice NCTE Guideline) : -  1018 (14%)
 टीईटी + एकेडेमिक अंक (Process will halt, as matter may go in court ) : -   1379 (19%)
कोई राय नही :-   53 (0%)


अब तक के वोट: 6936 
पोल बंद कर दिया गया है 




Read more...

UPTET on Facebook

On Facebook


सारिका श्रीवास्तव   >>>> UPTET & Appointment as Primary Teachers >>>

श्री अंकित परिहार जो कि उन्नाव से कांग्रेस के एक युवा और उच्च शिक्षित नेता है और विगत विधानसभा में भगवन्तनगर सीट से चुनाव लडे थे और वो प्रदेश के सबसे कम उम्र के उम्मीदवार थे ,उन्होने मेरी वाल के माध्यम से सभी टेटिअन्स को संदेश दिया है । अंकित जी के बारे मे मै आपको बताना चाहूँगी कि यह एक योग्य उच्चशिक्षित महत्वाकांक्षी व्यक्ति है जो कि शिक्षा के लिये अतिसंवेदनशील है व हमारी सांसद माननीया अन्नू टंडन जी के दाया हाथ है । अंकित जी ने मुझको व्यक्तिगत रूप से यह भी अवगत कराया है कि हमने जो ज्ञापन सांसद जी को दिया था वो उस पर वो गहन अध्यन कर रही हैं और आगामी मानसून सत्र में संसद मे उठायेगी ...
आज हमको ऐसे ही महत्वाकांक्षी युवा नेतृत्वकर्ता की आवश्यकता है जो हमारे समाज में शिक्षा की करी जा रही उपेक्षा को समझे और इस क्षेत्र में सक्रिय रूप से सम्मलित हो कर शिक्षा व्यवस्था में सुधार ला सके ।

Er Ankit Pariharposted to  >>> सारिका श्रीवास्तव : -

उत्तर प्रदेश के परिषदीय विद्यालयों में नियुक्त होने की राह को राजनैतिक विद्वेष की भावना ने कलुषित कर दिया है। सत्ताप्राप्त राजनैतिक दल बदले कि भावना से कार्य कर रहा है। प्रदेश के प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में गुणवत्तापूरक अध्यापन सुनिश्चित करने के लिये केन्द्र ने अध्यापक पात्रता परीक्षा की जो व्यवस्था अपनायी उसे राजनीति ग्रस लेना चाहती है। संक्रमण की इस बेला में टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों को अपनी एकता बनाये रखना अपरिहार्य है। मौजूदा सरकार के रवैये को देखकर तो यही लगता है की सरकार नियुक्ति को लेकर गम्भीर ही नहीं है और वह परिषदीय विद्यालयों में किसी की भी नियुक्ति चाहती ही नहीं। सरकार जानबूझ कर अकादमिक और टीईटी के पेंच में सारी प्रक्रिया को उलझा कर प्रदेश के प्राथमिक विद्यालयों में अपने एजेण्टों की भर्ती करना चाहती है। यह आपको लडाकर अपना उल्लू सीधा करना चाहती है। सावधान रहियेगा। बहाओ खून सडकों पर मगर इतना कभी सोचो वतन जब खून मागेंगा, तुम्हारे पास क्या होगा?

Read more...

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Use of Fluid Ink in Examination

Use of Fluid Ink in Examination

In SSC Examination -
http://sscnr.net.in/newlook/site/index.aspx
IT HAS COME TO THE NOTICE OF COMMISSION THAT SOMETIMES THE CANDIDATES DESIRE TO ALTER/ CORRECT THE ANSWERS ALREADY RECORDED ON OMR ANSWER SHEET BY FILLING IN OR DARKENING THE RECTANGLE/ OVAL ON OMR SHEET BY BLUE OR BLACK PEN. THE COMMISSION HAS DECIDED THAT CORRECTING FLUID MAY BE ALLOWED IN THE EXAMINATION HALL FOR THIS PURPOSE. 

For more details contact relevant authority.
*****************
However it is not clear that in UPTET 2011, Fluid ink correction is allowed OR not.
May be purpose of using ball point in Exam is that - Once a candidate marked/circled answers then after this nobody will correct it.

Earlier Pencil used to marked/circled answers, but due to cheating in Railway etc. examination, Use of ball point pen is started.

Sometimes candidates also use Fluid Ink to correct answers ( May be a rare case as some UPTET candidates claiming this and referred me SSC link).
Read more...

Jharkhand Primary Teacher Recruitment - Decision by Ranchi Highcourt

Jharkhand Primary Teacher Recruitment - Decision by Ranchi Highcourt


Anjuman Taraqqi-E-Urdu ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 22 November, 2011
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 3099 of 2011

----

1.Anjuman Taraqqi-e-Urdu Jharkhand

2.Md. Manzer Hussain

3.Md. Mojahid Alam .... Petitioners Vs.

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand

3.The Jharkhand Academic Council

4.The Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council. Respondents ------

W.P. (S) No. 6592 of 2011

Krishna Murari Prasad ... ... ... ... Petitioner Vs.

1.State of Jharkhand

2.The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand

3.The Jharkhand Academic Council.. ... Respondents ------

W.P. (PIL) No. 6495 of 2011

Balmiki Chaubey ... ... ... ... ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.The Secretary, Department of Human Resources

3.The Director, Primary and Secondary Education

4.The Regional Deputy Director, Education, Ranchi

5.The Jharkhand Academic Council

6.The Secretary, The Jharkhand Academic Council.... Respondents -------

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. S.P. Jha, Sr. Adv. M/s Manoj Tandon, S.S. Kumar,

N.K. Singh, B. Singh, N. Sharmin,

S. Kumar, L.K. Singh, S. Jha, A.K. Jha

For the Intervener : M/s D. Jerath, R. Krishna, A.K. Yadav For the Resp-State : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, A.A.G For the J.A.C : Mr. M. Sohail Anwar, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Ruby Parween, Adv.

Reportable ------ Dated 22nd November, 2011 By Court Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the Interveners.

2. The petitioners are challenging the entire selection process initiated vide advertisement No. 27/2011 dated 26th March, 2011 by which the respondents want to select and appoint about 18,000 primary teachers in Primary Schools run by the State Government.

3. The recruitment of the primary school teachers in the State of Jharkhand is regulated by the Jharkhand Primary School Appointment Rules, 2002, which has been framed by exercising the power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule (8) provides for holding two tests, one Preliminary Test and another Final Test, which are required to be cleared before any appointment on the post of teacher for primary classes i.e., for Class of I to Class V in Government Schools can be given. These Rules were amended time to time, which included the amendment made vide notification dated 26th December, 2006 then vide notification dated 14th August, 2007 and vide notification dated 16th September, 2009. Yet another amendment came vide notification dated 23rd October, 2009 and the petitioner has challenged the validity of Clause (III) of Sub-Rule (Ka) of Rule 8 and also proviso to Clause (VI) of Sub-Rule (Ka) of Rule 8 to the extent whereby it has been provided that obtaining of 35 % marks in the case of general category and 30 % marks in tribal language and regional language in the case of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes respectively, shall be compulsory to qualify for main examination for Primary School Teachers appointment in the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner also sought relief to declare Rule 8 (Kha) of Jharkhand Primary School Appointment Rules, 2002 as brought by Rule 3 of Jharkhand Primary School (second amendment) Appointment Rule ultra vires and consequently sought the relief of quashing the Advertisement No. 27 of 2011 published on 26th March, 2011.

4. Facts of the case are that the advertisement, Annexure-7, which is advertisement no. 27 of 2011 was issued to fill up post of 4401 Urdu Assistant Teachers and also for filling up 13,807 posts of Assistant Teacher of other than Urdu Assistant Teachers. The total bifurcation of the seats district-wise and reservation of seats have also been given in detail in the advertisement. The last date for submitting the application form of this selection process was 15.4.2011. The advertisement also contains that in preliminary test, there will be two papers; one of General Knowledge of 50 marks and second will be the paper of Regional/Tribal language of 50 marks. Thereafter, a schedule has been given in the advertisement showing which tribal and regional language will be for a particular district. It is clearly mentioned as a condition that the applicant, who is applying for vacant post in a particular district, shall have to take examination for the languages given against the column of that district. In Clause 5 of the advertisement, it is provided that, for appearing the main examination the candidate shall be required to obtain 35 % marks in 
General Knowledge and Tribal/Regional language for general category and 30% marks for reserved category. Then the separate examination of 300 marks has been prescribed in the advertisement which consists of examination which is as under :-

1.Language 100 marks (Ka)General Teacher-Hindi and English

(Kha)Urdu Teacher-Urdu and English

2.Social Science 100 marks

3.General Science 100 marks 300 marks

5. After advertising these posts and expiry of last date for submitting applications for appointment on the post of primary school teachers in Urdu and General category, on 19.5.2011, another advertisement no. 45 of 2011 was issued whereby the examination which was scheduled to be held on 29.5.2011 was postponed and it was notified that new date will be notified afterwards. Then on 25.5.2011 another notification no. 46 of 2011 was published in the newspaper, whereby it has been declared that the primary teachers test which was initiated by the advertisement no. 27 of 2011 dated 26.3.2011 shall be treated to be at par with the Teachers Eligibility Test (in short TET), which is a test required for getting any appointment on the post of teacher in view of the guidelines issued by the National Council for Teachers Education (in short NCTE) which mandatorily require that only a person who has obtained a TET 5
certificate shall be eligible for appointment on the post of Primary School Teacher. According to the State, to make the selection and appointment of the teachers in the State of Jharkhand in consonance with the national policy, new criteria was prescribed by advertisement no. 46 of 2011. By this advertisement, not only the Primary Teachers Eligibility Test has been made combined test for Primary Teachers Eligibility Test cum TET but entire pattern of test and marking criteria have been changed. The changed pattern and marking are as under :-

1.General Knowledge/Environmental Studies 30 marks

2.Mathematics: 30 marks

3.Language: (Ka)Tribal/Regional language: 30 marks

4.Language: (Kha)Hindi (For Hindi Teachers) Urdu (For Urdu Teachers): 30 marks

5.Child Development and Education : 30 marks Total marks 150 marks

The examination shall be of two hours and minimum pass marks shall be 60 % for general category candidates and for candidates of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes minimum pass marks shall be 50 %. In this advertisement no. 46 of 2011 dated 25.5.2011 again it has been repeated that those candidates who will secure 60 % and 50 % in general category and SC/ST category respectively will be eligible to appear in the main examination. In this very advertisement it is also mentioned that rest of the conditions mentioned in the original advertisement shall remain as it is. Meaning thereby, requirement of obtaining 35% and 30% marks in tribal language and regional language and upon passing this examination, the candidate will have to face Final Test for appointment.

6. Thereafter, another advertisement no. 55 of 2011 was issued by the State by which the date for examination and the centres for examination were notified. The date for examination was fixed as 20.7.2011. The writ petitioner, even before issuance of the advertisement no. 46 of 2011 dated 25.5.2011 approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition on 18.5.2011 and sought the relief as we have already referred above. On 13.09.2011, this Court passed an interim order that the result of the examination shall be subject to the outcome of the instant writ petition. On 14.11.2011, after hearing the parties at length passed the interim order that the State Government shall not issue any appointment orders in the present process of selection.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the process of selection for appointment once started, it is required to be completed according to the Rules which were in existence and in the present process of selection and appointment everything, i.e., subjects, marking pattern and even the purpose of the examination has been changed after the expiry of last date of submission of application form. Now it has been made a certificate course of TET under the guidelines of the NCTE and then to give appointment without any final test.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the prescribing of 35% and 30% marks in the regional and tribal language violates the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and further, such marks have been prescribed without there being any nexus and for any object which can be achieved. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that by this, virtually all posts have been reserved for the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ignoring the fact that 74% of the population in the State of Jharkhand are not belonging to the tribal community and the percentage of the members of tribal community is only 26%. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the subsequent amendments made by issuing various notifications i.e., notifications dated 14.5.2011, 23.5.2011 are also absolutely illegal and even if not illegal, these notifications are prospective and in fact notification dated 23.5.2011 changing entire examination pattern is not by amending the Rules of 2002 but has been done by an executive order, therefore, change in examination pattern is contrary to Rules of 2002 and therefore, illegal. It is submitted that a process which was started for taking the preliminary test and main examination, has been converted into not only a process of giving appointment by one examination dispensing with the second examination and that too without amending or deleting the relevant Rules which provide for final examination after preliminary test and furthermore, the required minimum marks have been increased from 50% to 60% by executive order. In sum and substance, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the process of selection and appointment can be completed only according to the Rule which was in existence and none of the subsequent decision can change the procedure so as to detrimental to the interest of the eligible candidates.

9. It will be worthwhile to note here that after the advertisement (Annexure-7) i.e., Advertisement No. 27 of 2011 dated 26.03.2011 no opportunity was given to any of the candidate or person in the State of Jharkhand to apply for the TET if the State Government could have completed this process of selection and appointment on the post of teacher to a certificate course for the TET. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein keeping the regional language as mandatory requirement has not been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court delivered in the case of Hindi Hitrakshak Samiti & Others Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (1990) 2 SCC 352, Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Anr. reported in (2004) 6 SCC 254 and judgement in the case of Dahiben & Others Vs. Vasanji Kevalbhai & Ors. reported in 1995 Supp (2) SCC 295 which we shall be considering hereinafter.

10. The State has come up with the case that after the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Eduction Act, 2009, the Government has recognized the right of children to have education, rather say, the children's education has been made compulsory and that is in consonance with the Article 21A of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, large number of teachers are required to be appointed to fulfill the aims and object of the Act of 2009 of free and compulsory education to children in the State. It is also submitted that State of Jharkhand has its peculiar situation as it is dominantly habitated by the members of the Scheduled Tribes and members of the Scheduled Castes and that too in remote village places where children are required to have primary education in their own language i.e., regional and tribal language. It is submitted by learned counsel for the State that the State could not have given any appointment to a person who has not cleared the TET and the State came to know about the guidelines issued by the NCTE on 06.04.2011 i.e., after issuance of Advertisement No. 27 of 2011 dated 26.3.2011, though those guidelines were issued prior, on 11.02.2011.

Therefore, when the State came to know about these guidelines, immediately and without any delay, to make this selection process in consonance with the guidelines of the NCTE, in exceptional circumstances, a decision was taken as one time measure, to have one combined test in place to having separate TET and Teachers Appointment Test. It is submitted that, so has been done as one time measure which is apparent and very clear from the decision of the Government dated 14.05.2011 and that has been notified in the newspaper and was given full publicity. It is submitted that even if such step would not have been taken by the State, then even after the examination under the original advertisement, the State would not have been in a position to give any appointment because of the condition of the NCTE requiring the TET. The subjects have also been changed and marking pattern also have been changed only because of the reason that everything should have been in consonance with the guidelines of the NCTE. It is submitted that no prejudice has been caused to any of the candidates.

11. Learned counsel for the State vehemently submitted that in fact what has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners before this Court is beyond what the petitioners have pleaded in his writ petition. Their grievance was confined only to the prescribing minimum pass marks for the two examinations i.e., tribal language and regional language. 11

At the most, it may be said that the petitioners may have grievance of prescribing particular language for a particular district but in writ petition it is not the case of the writ petitioners that the subsequent amendments made by the State are, in any manner, illegal. In view of the above, learned counsel for the State vehemently submitted that this Court should not examine other issues which may be attractive and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel supporting the petitioner who were permitted to argue because they also have preferred separate writ petitions one in the form of Public Interest Litigation i.e., W.P.(PIL) No. 6495 of 2011 and another W.P.(S) No. 6592 of 2011, are liable to be ignored.

12. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that after filing of W.P. (S) No. 3099 of 2011, both these petitioners themselves appeared in the examination conducted by the State and therefore, by their conduct they themselves have accepted all the changed conditions prescribed for the examination. In W.P.(S) No. 6592 of 2011 the writ petitioner appeared in the examination and has failed then preferred this petition, which is clear from the fact that he has filed the writ petition on 16.11.2011. It is submitted that in view of the above, this writ petition is not maintainable because, if the petitioner would have succeeded in the examination, he would not have challenged the selection process.

13. Learned senior counsel for the State also submitted that large number of vacancies are there in the State of Jharkhand of the teachers and if the selection is quashed and set aside then it will be against the interest of the children of the State of Jharkhand.

14. Learned counsel for the Jharkhand Academic Council, who was entrusted with the task of conducting the examination, submitted that the Jharkhand Academic Council has conducted the examination in view of the direction given by the State Government and in accordance with the Rules of 2002 and they have published the result. It is submitted that about 1,31,000 candidates appeared in the examination.

15. Learned Counsel Sri Delip Jerath, supporting State's decisions, vehemently submitted that the scope of the Courts in the matter where policy decisions are involved is very limited. He heavily relied upon Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgement delivered in the case of Transport and Dock Workers Union & Ors. Vs. Mumbai Port Trust & Anr. reported in (2011) 2 SCC 575 and also relied upon another judgement delivered in the case of Nand Kishore Ojha Vs. Anjani Kumar Singh reported in (2010) 6 SCC 648 wherein the question of taking one time measure has been considered and according to learned counsel Sri Jerath, the State Government has taken a decision to meet with the specific contingency and took the decision to meet with urgent requirement of appointment. It is also submitted that it is nowhere provided that the two examinations could not have been clubbed together so as to have an examination for the TET along with the examination for giving appointment on the post of primary school teachers. It is also submitted that if a classification has been made by creating two classes then that also is justified if it has been done on the basis of the rationale classification.

16. Learned counsel Sri R. Krishna, who appeared as an intervener, submitted that "examination" is not a "selection process for appointment". It is submitted that process of appointment starts only after the eligibility test and, therefore, during this period if any amendment has been made, it is not violative to any of the law. Learned counsel Sri R. Krishna relied upon judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. R. Dayal & Ors. reported in (1997) 10 SCC 419 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the procedure which was in force at the time of initiation of process of selection shall be the process and according to learned counsel Sri R. Krishna if any change is made prior to date of start of process of selection for appointment then that is legal and valid and cannot take away any vested right of any of the persons.

17. At this juncture, it will be relevant to mention here that according to learned counsel for the State, a writ petition was preferred before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being Civil Writ (C) No. 173 of 2011 to challenge this selection process and therein one Interlocutory Application being I.A. No. 203 of 2011 was also filed but that was dismissed on 9th September, 2011 and thereafter, the present result has been declared on 15.10.2011.

18. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the facts of the case. It is not in dispute that vide advertisement No. 27 of 2011 dated 26.03.2011, the process of selection and appointment on the post of teachers in the subject of Urdu as well as for general subjects was started and this process was started under the Rules of 2002. The eligibility criteria was fixed as has been given in the Rules of 2002. It is clearly provided in the Rules of 2002 as well as in the said advertisement dated 26.03.2011 that there will be two examinations - one shall be preliminary examination and second will be the main examination. Any candidate of general category who will secure 35% marks in the subject i.e., General Knowledge and in Tribal and Regional Language and any candidate of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe category who secure 30% marks in the same way shall be eligible to appear in the main examination. The last date for submitting the application was 25.04.2011. It is not in dispute that by subsequent notification dated 14.5.2011 and by executive order dated 23.5.2011 (without amending the relevant Rule), the preliminary eligibility test has been converted into altogether new test leaving nothing original to be done under original advertisement, neither examination remained preliminary test nor papers remained same, nor maximum marks for papers remained same, nor minimum pass marks remained same. It is very pertinent that notification dated 14.5.2011 is notification to amend Rules of 2002 but in fact nothing has been added and nothing has been deleted or amended in Clause 8 (Ka) of the Rules of 2002 and this notification is, without amending relevant Rules, only made declaration that rule 8 (Ka) is amended and as one time measure, preliminary test shall be at par with Teachers Eligibility Test (TET). Therefore, even after notification dated 14.5.2011, the Rule 8 (Ka) remained as it is and even the government also understood, so which is clear from advertisement dated 24-25.5.2011 wherein even after notification dated 14.5.2011, in the advertisement dated 24-25.5.2011 it is again declared that there shall be main examination after this preliminary cum TET (test). It appears that state issued notification and passed one after another order, that too after expiry of last date for submitting applications under the original advertisement but neither marking pattern has been changed in the Rules of 2002 nor Rules of 2002 have been amended to make the examination in question as final selection and appointment examination. Therefore, the examination and declaration of results on the basis of preliminary examination is illegal being contrary to Rule 8 (ka) of Rules of 2002.

19. None of the any persons in the state had knowledge that the State is going to conduct TET, therefore, any person who was aspirant for Teachers Eligibility Test had no opportunity to apply for this test. Even the persons who applied under impugned advertisement had no knowledge that they are applying for TET cum preliminary Teachers Selection Test. It appears that State had impression that, since they have power to issue order as well as right to enact, therefore, the State can do anything, can pass any order or amend Rules any time and in any manner and that too, not only after inviting applications under specific rules for appointment of teachers but even after last date for submitting the application can change the entire process as well purpose for which such applications invited. This is, therefore, glaring example of colurable exercise of power which amounts to malafide in law as it has deprived all candidates from competing on the basis of marks prescribed not only in the advertisement but as prescribed in the Rules of 2002 and denied opportunity to all eligible candidates to apply for Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) from entire State of Jharkhand and which is 
sought to be converted into from eligibility test to test for appointment.

20. The contention of the State is that the amendment and specifically the amendment made in the marking pattern and subjects vide advertisement dated 25.05.2011 were made because of the reason that on 26.04.2011 i.e., after publication of the advertisement on 26.03.2011, they came to know that it is mandatory condition prescribed by the NCTE that appointment on the post of teacher can be given only to those persons who possess the TET certificate and since it came to their knowledge only in April, 2011, they decided to prescribe all the norms of TET in the same process of selection and appointment so as to avoid further delay in the matter of appointment on the post of teachers in the State of Jharkhand for primary level schools. However, we are of the considered opinion that the plea taken by the State appears to be, if not false, it is wrong, because of the reason that the condition of having TET certificate as mandatory condition for appointment on the post of teacher was prescribed by the NCTE much earlier, on 23.08.2010 and not in the year 2011. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the State submitted that though notification was issued on 23.08.2010 (Annexure- B submitted along with the supplementary counter affidavit by the State itself) but no guidelines were issued under the said notification and, therefore, the TET could not have been conducted.
The plea taken by the State is no justification for State's action rather, if it is so, then it is more serious matter. If the State had knowingly, and in fact had knowledge that State cannot give appointment to teacher without qualifying TET then the State should not have proceeded to invite applications of the candidates from entire State of Jharkhand. The stand of the State is self contradictory as well as cannot be said to be justified stand. It is not expected from any State that even after knowing mandatory condition, they will invite large number of public from the entire State of Jharkhand by projecting that incumbent will get appointment on the post of teacher. If the State was sure that it cannot give any appointment till the guidelines are issued by the competent authority, how the State could have issued the advertisement for appointment in violation to the NCTE guidelines when the NCTE duly notified and published in the Gazette dated 23.8.2010 and made it mandatory to give appointment on the post of teacher who passes TET, has not been explained by the State in any manner. The State also has no answer that if the guidelines would not have come even for another 1 - 2 years, then what would have happened to this process which they have started ?

20. Be that as it may be, the State's plea that the State could know about the guidelines of the NCTE dated 11.02.2011 only on 06.04.2011, we are believing only because of the fact that the State is stating so, and
therefore, we are believing. If it is true then, not much time was passed to advertisement dated 26.3.2011 no last date for applying passed then the State should have immediately withdrawn this advertisement dated 26.3.2011 and should have proceeded to conduct fresh test for TET certificate and if wished to take combined test, should have first amended the rules as one time measure and should have given fresh opportunity to all the eligible person in the State of Jharkhand to apply. At this juncture, we may again observe that marking pattern and papers given in the Advertisement No. 46 of 2011 are contrary to rules which are in force even today as Rule 8 (Ka) has not been amended by notification dated 14.5.2011 or for marks or for making it one examination for appointment. Furthermore, the last date for submitting the applications for selection on the post of such teachers was 15.04.2011 and decision to convert this selection process into a certificate process cum selection process was taken after 15th April, 2011 and all the candidates who would have aspirants for obtaining the certificate of the TET stand deprived from applying in this process. The person who were knowing well that only a candidate who possesses the TET certificate could have been given appointment, may not have applied for his selection in the process started by the advertisement dated 26.03.2011. We could not find out any of the justifications from any of the arguments or submissions made by the State that if a decision was taken to convert this selection process into certification process cum appointment process then why opportunity was not granted to all so as to make the competition wider.

22. It is also not in dispute that under the guidelines of NCTE, it is provided under Clause (9) that qualifying the TET would not confer a right on any person for recruitment/employment as it is only one of the eligibility criteria for appointment. Therefore, the TET itself cannot create a right to appointment. If the State had any intention to declare that a TET certificate holder shall be appointed then it should also have been known to everybody before advertising the post and at least before last date fixed in advertisement so that the candidates could have availed this opportunity. Not only this, as per the provision made under Clause 10, a TET certificate holder who obtains such certificate from any State/Union Territory then the other states may decide not to conduct a TET and can give appointment to the TET certificate holder in another State. Not only this, from the scheme of the TET, it is clear that it is not dependent upon the number of seats and a TET certificate can be given to any number of persons irrespective of the availability of the post because of the reason that it is just an eligibility test creating no right to appointment and in this situation even the number of posts as advertised in advertisement no. 27 of 2011 dated 26.03.2011 were absolutely irrelevant and this also may not have caused confusion in the minds of many persons who may have not applied by treating that there are number of limited posts available in each of the districts which has been disclosed in the advertisement.

23. Now what more has been done is that subjects have been changed and the subject of Mathematics has been included in the test which was not in the advertisement dated 26.03.2011, The subject of Child Development and Education was also not in the advertisement dated 26.03.2011. Inclusion of these subjects may also have changed the scope of competition by more applicants who may be good students of Mathematics as paper of 30 marks has been given for this subject.

24. The core question is that whether all the above could have been changed from the original process of selection and appointment started vide notification dated 26.03.2011? For this we take help from the judgement cited by the learned counsel for the State itself i.e., State of Bihar and Others Vs. Mithilesh Kumar reported in (2010) 13 SCC 467 wherein after considering various judgements of the Supreme Court, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "we all say in one voice that the norms and rules as existing on the dates when the process of selection begins will control such selection and any alteration to such norms would not affect the continuing 22

process." Learned counsel for the State submitted that this proposition has been clarified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this very judgment by making it clear that "unless specifically the same (amendment in rules) were given retrospective effect." Here in this case, the clarification which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the State has no application inasmuch as it has not been shown that any of the Rule has been made applicable retrospectively so as to make this selection process guided by any retrospectively operative Rules or retrospective amendment of the Rules. Rather say, the judgement only applies to the extent that the process of selection is required to be controlled and governed by the Rules which were existing at the time of start of selection process. We find support to our view from the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Madan Mohan Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. reported in (2008) 3 SCC 724. In the said case, after holding that the subsequent amendment of the rules which was prospective, cannot be made retrospective so as to make the selection on the basis of the rules which were subsequently amended. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, if this was to be done then the only course left open was to recall the advertisement and issue fresh advertisement according to the Rules which had come into force. In the case of Sonia Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. reported in (2007) 10 SCC 627 and in 23

yet another judgment delivered in the case of N.T. Devin Katti & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Public Service Commission & Ors. reported in (1990) 3 SCC 157, it has been observed that where selection process has been initiated by issuing an advertisement inviting applications selection should normally be regulated by the Rule or Order then prevailing and also when advertisement expressly states that appointment shall be made in accordance with the existing Rule or Orders, subsequent amendment in the existing Rule or Order will not affect the pending selection process unless contrary intention is expressly or impliedly indicated. A similar view has been taken in the case of Hemani Malhotra Vs. High Court of Delhi reported in (2008) 7 SCC 11, in the case of Rakhi Ray & Ors. Vs. High Court of Delhi & Others reported in (2010) 2 SCC 637.

25. Not only this, the question papers have been changed, marking pattern has been changed, criteria for selection and requirement of obtaining minimum marks have also been changed, furthermore, a communication has been sent on 11.10.2011 by the Principal Secretary, Human Resources and Development Department of the State to Chair-person, Jharkhand Academic Council, conveying that the State Government has, by this decision, decided that the candidates selected in preliminary test shall be entitled to appointment and he will not have to face the main examination as notified in the original advertisement and required by Rules of 2002. Therefore, by this change, the preliminary test has been converted, not only into final test but created a right to appointment on the post. In this situation, the argument of learned counsel Sri R. Krishna that preliminary test or TET is not selection process for appointment cannot survive. At this juncture, it will be worthwhile to mention here that a person could have succeeded in preliminary examination if he would have obtained a lower marks i.e., 35% of 30% marks in the language subjects but without amending rules, all those who may have got these marks have been deprived to appear in the final examination as the persons who secured marks less than 60 % have been declared failed. Therefore, a stringent criteria has also been prescribed.

26. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the State has not yet taken any decision (though copy of the communication dated 11.10.2011 is on record) because, for taking such decision, the Rule will require to be amended and today the State is not in a position to give any appointment to successful candidates because the Rule has not been amended to dispense with the main examination. Then in fact, as per law existing today, the State has no right to give any appointment even to the candidates who have been declared successful in the examination because of the plain and simple reason that the successful candidates faced the examination only 
under the advertisement dated 26.03.2011, then they can be only successful candidates for preliminary and not for main examination but at the same time the examination were not in accordance with rules or as per the advertisement dt. 26.3.2011, therefore, the successful candidates cannot be declared successful candidates even for preliminary test for Teachers appointment. It appears that the State took the decisions time to time and thereafter, tried to become wise and issued various notices and advertisements which is apparent from the fact that in spite of having condition of TET for appointment on the post of teachers, the State proceeded to advertise huge number of vacancies running in about 18,000 and invited applications of 1,31,000 candidates from entire State. Then State became wise when it received the guidelines on 06.04.2011 and issued another notice instead of withdrawing the process of selection itself and tried to make the conditions of original appointment in consonance with the guidelines issued by the NCTE. At that time also, there was no decision that the candidates who will appear in this combined or common test for TET and for selection and appointment shall not have to go for main examination and then on 11.10.2011 it has been conveyed to the Jharkhand Academic Council that the State (without amending the Rules of 2002) has taken decision to give appointment to such selected candidates directly on the post without
there being completion or having the main examination and now the State's stand is that such decision has not yet attained finality and not became the part of the Rule. Therefore, till today nobody knows how these selected candidates will be dealt with and these selected candidates are under illusion that they are about to get the appointment order whereas, the candidates who were declared successful were not successful candidates either under rules which are in existence today nor as per advertisement conditions.

27. In view of the above reasons, we found from the facts of the case that nothing survives in the advertisement dated 26.03.2011 in view of the subsequent acts and actions of the State Government except misleading the all candidates who appeared in the examination which is said to be 1,31,000 in numbers.

28. We tried to explore the possibility of saving the interest of the candidates who secured good marks in the examination but it is difficult in view of the fact that the examination itself was contrary to Rules. Process of selection which should be transparent, known to all and thereafter there must be a fair competition which, in the facts of the case, is totally missing and therefore, we have no option but to declare the entire process taken after the issuance of advertisement dated 26.03.2011, to be absolutely illegal, null and void.

29. In addition to above, other points which have 27

been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition with respect to prescribing of minimum marks for tribal and regional language for particular district and requiring of obtaining minimum marks are concerned, we are not deciding these issues in view of quashing of entire selections. Accordingly, the writ petition of the petitioner is allowed and consequently the Advertisement dated 26.03.2011 and entire process of selection undertaken under this advertisement is quashed. We also do not find any force in the submission of learned Additional Advocate General that issues raised are beyond the scope of writ because of the reason the petitioner has placed on record all relevant facts and more important is glaring illegalities are apparent from the face of the record placed by the State and the Academic Council of the State and the State got full opportunity to justify their own stand and this Court cannot ignore these illegalities. However, it is expected from the State Government to now proceed for appointment of the teachers de-novo by following the guidelines issued by the NCTE and in accordance with the Rules for appointment as the NCTE has only prescribed the eligibility criteria, passing of the TET whereas, the prescribing procedure for appointment on the post is the prerogative of the State and is in its jurisdiction, therefore, the procedure may be evolved by the State Government so as to avoid further delay in the 28

matter. The session for schools will start from the month of July, 2012, therefore, before that, all appointment can be made by the State Government before next session.

30. The writ petition is allowed as above. In view of the fact that entire process of selection and the advertisement dated 26.03.2011 have been quashed and set aside, therefore, writ petitions being W.P.(PIL) No. 6495 of 2011 and W.P.(S) No. 6592 are also disposed of with observation that before taking any decision all issues which have been raised in this petition and in W.P. (PIL) No. 6495 and in W.P. (S) No. 6592 of 2011 may also be considered and if the State finds more corrections and amendments in the rules are required they may be made in accordance with law, if needed only.

31. No order as to costs.

(Prakash Tatia, C J)

(P.P. Bhatt, J)

Read more...