/* remove this */

Wednesday, May 30, 2018

News - कोर्ट : राज्य सरकार चाहे तो नई ट्रांसफर पॉलिसी घोषित कर सकती है, पुरानी प्रक्रिया महिलाओं के स्थानांतरण 8(2)(d) प्रभावित नहीं होगी -

News - कोर्ट : राज्य सरकार चाहे तो नई ट्रांसफर पॉलिसी घोषित कर सकती है, पुरानी प्रक्रिया महिलाओं के स्थानांतरण 8(2)(d) प्रभावित नहीं होगी 

याची का कहना था कि राज्य सरकार हर वर्ष नई स्थानन्तरण नीति घोषित करती है, और नए सत्र के लिए भी स्थानन्तरण नीति घोषित करनी चाहिए, 
याची पुरुषों के लिए 5 वर्ष में बदलाव करवाना चाहते थे, उनका कहना था कि अभी पिछली ट्रांसफर नीति के तहत ट्रांसफर नहीं हुए हैं, और नई स्थानन्तरण नीति उसकी जगह आनी चाहिए

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

?Court No. - 58 

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 30538 of 2017 

Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Singh And 4 Ors. 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors. 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendu Ojha,Radeha Kant Ojha 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav 

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. 
Following prayers have been made in the writ petition:- 
"(a).� A writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 13.6.2017 (Annexure -3 to the writ petition) passed by the Addl. Chief Secretary, U.P. Shashan, Lucknow, the respondent no.2, as well as, impugned order dated 17.6.2017 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) passed by the Secretary, U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad, the respondent no.3. 
(b).� A writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to make transfer and posting of the petitioners as per RTE Act, 2009 and Rules framed thereunder and also as per Rules, 2011." 
This Court while entertaining the writ petition had granted following interim protection on 31.7.2017:- 
"This writ petition has been preferred by the five petitioners for the common cause of action and for the same relief. All the petitioners are working as Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic Schools and Senior Basic Schools conducted and managed by the U.P. Board of Basic Education under the U.P. Basic Eduction Act, 1972. 
They are aggrieved by the Government Order dated 13.6.2017 whereby a decision has been taken to transfer/ adjust the excess teachers working in Junior and Senior Basic Schools for the academic session 2017-18. 
It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the Government order has not taken into consideration the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. It is submitted that Section 19 of the Act, 2009 lays down norms and standards for School, which have been specified in the Schedule framed thereunder. In the Schedule the teacher and student ratio is provided. It also lays down that there shall be at least one teacher per class (for sixth class to eight class) so that there shall be at least one teacher for (i) Science and Mathematics; (ii) Social Studies; and, (iii) Languages. 
It is also contended that the State Government has extended the last date of admission in the Basic Schools till 31.7.2017, thus without taking into consideration the correct number of students a large number of teachers are being declared surplus. 
I have heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shivendu Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel, and Sri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the third respondent. 
Sri A.K. Yadav has received instructions, which are on the record. On the strength of the instructions he submits that no last date has been fixed for admission. It is also mentioned that if in an institution there is only one Science Teacher he/she shall not be replaced. 
The instructions are wholly unsatisfactory. From a perusal of the instructions it is manifest that the State Government has not taken into consideration the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Schedule framed therein. 
Sri Yadav has also submitted that in view of the subsequent development that the Supreme Court has found that the appointments of Shiksha Mitras are not valid, a fresh decision has to be taken considering the effect of the said judgment. He states that it will take some time to implement the impugned Government order. 
Learned Standing Counsel is granted two weeks' time to seek instructions in the matter. 
Put up this case on 21st August, 2017 in the additional cause list. Till then the teachers who have been declared surplus will not be relieved." 
It is not in issue that on account of interim protection granted by this Court in the instant writ, the State has not proceeded any further, except in relation to claim of female teachers where transfers are otherwise regulated by rule 8(2)(d) of� the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules, 2008. 
The academic session, which was intended to be regulated by the transfer policy dated 13.6.2017 is coming to a close. It is in this context that when the writ petition was taken up on 16.5.2018, following orders were passed:- 
"Petitioners have challenged the annual transfer policy issued in respect of teachers of institutions run by Basic Education Department. The petition was entertained in July, 2017 and was deferred from time to time. On 31.7.2017, a detailed order was passed in the matter and it was provided as an interim measure that teachers, who are declared surplus, will not be relieved. This interim protection has been extended from time to time and the writ petition has been listed today alongwith bunch of other petitions. 
Sri R. K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the year is coming to an end but no counter affidavit has been filed by the State in the matter so far. Even instructions have not been furnished in the matter by the State. It is stated that usually the transfer policy is issued for a year and is succeeded by fresh policy announced in the month of May/June of each year. Submission is that a new policy is likely to be announced in next few days. Argument is that the State Government by not filing a counter affidavit in the matter has allowed the proceedings to loose its sanctity. 
Large number of petitions raising similar grievance are pending before this Court and no counter affidavit has been filed till date. Sri P. K. Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State is thus instructed to take specific instructions as to whether the State proposes to issue a fresh transfer policy in the near future, in respect of intra-district transfers of teachers working in the institutions run by the Basic Shiksha Parishad, and if so, by when? 
Let instructions in that regard be obtained by the next date. Put up in the additional cause list on 21.5.2018." 
Sri P. K. Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has produced a communication dated 18.5.2018 received from the State, which is taken on record. As per the communication, a new transfer policy is under contemplation and is likely be announced shortly. 
It is admitted to the parties that on account of aforesaid interim order, the State has not proceeded pursuant to the Government Order dated 13.6.2017 in respect of intra-district transfer.� 
In view of the stand taken by the State, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending inasmuch as the transfer policy dated 13.6.2017, insofar as it relates to adjustment of teachers, within the district, has not been implemented so far and the term of such policy is otherwise coming to a close. A new policy since is likely to be announced by the State, shortly. This Court, therefore, need not examine challenge to the Government Order dated 13.6.2017, on merits. However, the State may proceed in accordance with law to issue a fresh policy for the year 2018-19. Petitioner's claim would be considered in accordance with the new policy. 
It is clarified that the challenge in the present writ petition since is at the instance of male teachers, who have not completed 5 year service, it would have no concern with transfers of female teachers as per rule 8(2)(d) of the Posting Rules, 2008. The authorities of the State shall thus be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law to process claim of female teachers' transfer under rule 8(2)(d) of the Posting Rules, 2008.� 
With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. 
Order Date :- 21.5.2018 
Ashok Kr. 




 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...

UPTET News - 29334 jrt bhrti से बी एड 12 TET 11 वाले बाहर, Professional vale safe

UPTET  News - 29334 jrt bhrti से बी एड 12 TET 11 वाले बाहर, Professional vale safe

Aaj rishi srivastava ki writ par sunwai hui......

Proffesionl & b. Ed 12 tet 11 matter par

Proffesionl safe 
B. Ed 12 & tet 11 bahar

Shesh vistar se court order Aane ke baad




 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...

Thursday, May 24, 2018

मेडिकल ग्राउंड पर ट्रांसफर का क्या औचित्य

मेडिकल ग्राउंड पर ट्रांसफर का क्या औचित्य 

आजकल तमाम लोगो में चर्चा है कि एकदम से मेडिकल ग्राउंड पर ट्रांसफर के केस बढ़ गए हैं , जबकि इनके लीव रिकॉर्ड में मेडिकल / परिवारीजनो (बच्चे /पत्नी ) की बीमारी  देखभाल के लिए छुट्टियां भी नहीं ली गयी होंगी , अधिकांश  (80% , 1568 केसेस ) मेडिकल ग्राउंड के ट्रांसफर केसेस 2015 और इसके जोइनिंग के बाद के लोगों के हैं | 

अब मुद्दे की बात पर आते हैं , मेडिकल बीमारी के दौरान ट्रांसफर गृह जिला या पसंदीदा जिला में होने के लिए क्या लिंक है | 
अगर व्यक्ति बीमार है तो हॉस्पिटल में इलाज कराएगा , लेकिन क्या वह बीमारी के दौरान छुट्टी नहीं लेगा , बीमारी की छुट्टी किस लिए है | 
चलो मान लेते हैं की बीमारी स्वयं की नहीं है लेकिन देखरेख के लिए तो छुट्टी लेनी पड़ेगी | 
चलो यह भी मान लेते हैं की व्यक्ति शाम को या किसी अन्य समय के दौरान बीमार व्यक्ति की देखभाल करना चाहता है , और उसके जगह  निकट ट्रांसफर चाहता है तो ऐसी स्थिति में उस हॉस्पिटल (जहाँ इलाज चल रहा है के नजदीक ट्रांसफर के लिए आवेदन कर सकता है , साथ ही यह भी होना चाहिए उसके वर्तमान कार्यस्थल के नजदीक ऐसे हॉस्पिटल नहीं हैं जहाँ बीमार व्यक्ति का इलाज संभव हो )

मेडिकल ग्राउंड पर ट्रांसफर के लिए ग्रह जिले में जाने के लिए अतिरिक्त नंबर क्यों जोड़े जा रहे हैं समझ से बहार है , अन्य शिक्षकों का भी परिवार है 
वे भी ग्रह जिले /पसंदीदा जिले में जाकर कार्य करना चाहते हैं , वास्तव में समस्त ट्रांसफर परिस्थितियों से जुड़े हैं 
और जरूरतमंदो को दस्तावेज के आधार पर ट्रांसफर की मार्किंग की जानी चाहिए | 

मेडिकल ग्राउंड पर ट्रांसफर में नाजायज फायदा किसी को नहीं मिलना चाहिए , सिर्फ विशेष परिस्थिति वाले केसेस में ही ट्रांसफर दिए जाने चाहिए ,
और पारदर्शिता की लिए ट्रांसफर का कारण व पर्याप्त जानकारी वेबसाइट पर उपलब्ध कराई जानी चाहिए 






 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...

Thursday, May 17, 2018

*हाई कोर्ट इलाहाबाद* पति पत्नी अंतर्जनपदीय तबादले के सभी मामलों पर निर्णय सुरक्षित कर लिया गया है । निर्णय 29 मई को सुनाया जायेगा

*हाई कोर्ट इलाहाबाद*
पति पत्नी अंतर्जनपदीय तबादले के सभी मामलों पर निर्णय सुरक्षित कर लिया गया है । निर्णय 29 मई को सुनाया जायेगा । ।

 मिली जानकारी के अनुसार सोशल मीडिया पर चर्चा है कि नीचे दी गयी रिट पति पत्नी आधार पर तबादले की है और 29 मई को इस पर फैसला आएगा

👇

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 58

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4950 of 2018

Petitioner :- Anuruddha Kumar Tripathi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dev Kant Trigunait,Lakshmi Kant Trigunait
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar,Bhanu Pratap Singh

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Put up for orders on 29.5.2018.
Order Date :- 16.5.2018
Ashok Kr.

Read more...

UPTET Shiksha Mitra News - टी ई टी qualification अब प्रमोशन के लिये भी जरूरी

UPTET Shiksha Mitra   News - टी ई टी  qualification अब प्रमोशन के लिये भी जरूरी 

जो टीचर जूनियर लेवल टेट पास कर  जूनियर में नियुक्ति पाए हैं , उनके लिए जरूरी नहीं, मतलब जूनियर का अध्यापक / हेडमास्टर प्रमोशन के लिए, क्योंकि वह आवश्यक योग्यता रखते हैं 

अन्य सभी  प्राथमिक / उच्च प्राथमिक अध्यापक को बगैर उच्च प्राथमिक टेट के 
सहायक अध्यापक जूनियर / हेड मास्टर जूनियर  के लिए टेट जरूरी है।

उपयुक्त सही जानकारी के लिए नीचे दिए ऑर्डर को किसी एक्सपर्ट एडवोकेट से जरूर समझ लें, 
Disclaimer : We are not expert in this field.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

?Court No. - 58 

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11287 of 2018 

Petitioner :- Deepak Sharma And 3 Others 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 16 Others 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Awadhesh Kumar,Satish Chandra Yadav,Shyam Krishna Gupta 

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. 
This petition has been filed seeking following reliefs: 
"i) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to limit consideration of candidates for promotion as Headmaster of Junior Basic School and Assistant Teacher / Headmaster of Senior Basic School to candidates possessing TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level) alone in pursuance to promotional exercise underway in pursuance to circular of Secretary, Board of Basic Education, U.P., Allahabad dated 28.03.2018. 
ii) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents not to accord any consideration for promotion as Headmaster - Junior Basic School and Assistant Teacher / Head Master, Senior Basic School of candidates not possessing TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level)." 
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon clause 4 of the notification dated 12.11.2014 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (in short, 'NCTE'), which reads as under: 
"4. Qualification for Recruitment:- 
(a) The qualifications for recruitment of teachers in any recognized school imparting Pre-primary, Primary, Upper Primary, Secondary, Senior Secondary or Intermediate Schools or Colleges imparting senior secondary education shall be as given in the First and Second Schedule(s) annexed to these Regulations. � 
(b) For promotion of teachers the relevant minimum qualifications as specified in the First and Second Schedule(s) are applicable for consideration from one level to the next level." 
Submission is that for the purposes of promotion to the post of Headmaster / Headmistress as well as to the post of Assistant Teacher, the requirement of obtaining certificates of TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level) would be mandatory.� It is contended that the respondents cannot enlarge the zone of consideration while considering the claim of promotion, even to those who do not possess the aforesaid qualification.� 
While entertaining this petition, the petitioners were permitted to implead NCTE as a party - respondent and its counsel was allowed time to obtain instructions in that regard.� Following orders were passed in the matter on 08.05.2018: 
"Petitioners contend that by virtue of regulation 4(b) of the NCTE Notification dated 12.11.2014, the qualification for promotion is also prescribed. Contention is that the qualification prescribed in the first and second schedule to the notification would equally apply for direct recruitment and promotion. It is also stated that section 23 of the Act of 2009 talks of appointment which includes promotion also. 
Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the NCTE seeks short indulgence in order to obtain specific instruction from NCTE in that regard. 
Put up as fresh on 15.5.2018." 
Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel representing respondent - NCTE, on the basis of the instructions, states that the requirement contained in clause 4(b) of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014 would have to be met by a candidate before he is considered for promotion to the post of Headmaster / Headmistress of junior basic school and Assistant Teacher / Headmaster of senior basic school. � 
Shri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel representing the respondent no. 3 as well as District Basic Education Officer, initially, tried to raise an objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition at the instance of the present petitioners on the ground that they do not possess requisite eligibility for promotion to the posts in question and therefore, the writ petition, at their instance, be not entertained.� 
However, in view of the averments made in paragraph no. 10 of the writ petition as well as in view of proviso to rule 8(3), the objection of the respondents is not liable to be sustained; in as much as, in the absence of availability of requisite number of teachers with TET qualification, the respondents have the jurisdiction to relax the qualification prescribed under the relevant Rules.� Even otherwise, the petitioner no. 1 is shown to have completed three years working as Assistant Teacher.� So far as the petitioners' claim, on merit, is concerned, the respondents have not been able to dispute it, effectively.� No provision of law has been shown disputing the averments made on behalf of the petitioners.� 
In such view of the matter, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to act strictly in accordance with the clause 4(b) of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014 and to restrict the zone of consideration for promotion to Teachers / Headmaster / Headmistress who possess requisite TET qualification in terms of the clause 4 of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014.� It would further be appropriate to observe that in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others (2013 (6) ADJ 310), it is the qualification, contained in the NCTE notification, which would be relevant and would have to be scrupulously followed and the respondents cannot bank upon the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 alone to consider the claim of promotion. 
Order Date :- 15.5.2018 
Amit Mishra 




 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...

UPTET Shiksha Mitra News - टी ई टी qualification अब प्रमोशन के लिये भी जरूरी

UPTET Shiksha Mitra   News - टी ई टी  qualification अब प्रमोशन के लिये भी जरूरी 

जो टीचर जूनियर लेवल टेट पास कर  जूनियर में नियुक्ति पाए हैं , उनके लिए जरूरी नहीं, मतलब जूनियर का अध्यापक / हेडमास्टर प्रमोशन के लिए, क्योंकि वह आवश्यक योग्यता रखते हैं 

अन्य सभी  प्राथमिक / उच्च प्राथमिक अध्यापक को बगैर उच्च प्राथमिक टेट के 
सहायक अध्यापक जूनियर / हेड मास्टर जूनियर  के लिए टेट जरूरी है।

उपयुक्त सही जानकारी के लिए नीचे दिए ऑर्डर को किसी एक्सपर्ट एडवोकेट से जरूर समझ लें, 
Disclaimer : We are not expert in this field.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

?Court No. - 58 

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11287 of 2018 

Petitioner :- Deepak Sharma And 3 Others 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 16 Others 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Awadhesh Kumar,Satish Chandra Yadav,Shyam Krishna Gupta 

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. 
This petition has been filed seeking following reliefs: 
"i) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to limit consideration of candidates for promotion as Headmaster of Junior Basic School and Assistant Teacher / Headmaster of Senior Basic School to candidates possessing TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level) alone in pursuance to promotional exercise underway in pursuance to circular of Secretary, Board of Basic Education, U.P., Allahabad dated 28.03.2018. 
ii) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents not to accord any consideration for promotion as Headmaster - Junior Basic School and Assistant Teacher / Head Master, Senior Basic School of candidates not possessing TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level)." 
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon clause 4 of the notification dated 12.11.2014 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (in short, 'NCTE'), which reads as under: 
"4. Qualification for Recruitment:- 
(a) The qualifications for recruitment of teachers in any recognized school imparting Pre-primary, Primary, Upper Primary, Secondary, Senior Secondary or Intermediate Schools or Colleges imparting senior secondary education shall be as given in the First and Second Schedule(s) annexed to these Regulations. � 
(b) For promotion of teachers the relevant minimum qualifications as specified in the First and Second Schedule(s) are applicable for consideration from one level to the next level." 
Submission is that for the purposes of promotion to the post of Headmaster / Headmistress as well as to the post of Assistant Teacher, the requirement of obtaining certificates of TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level) would be mandatory.� It is contended that the respondents cannot enlarge the zone of consideration while considering the claim of promotion, even to those who do not possess the aforesaid qualification.� 
While entertaining this petition, the petitioners were permitted to implead NCTE as a party - respondent and its counsel was allowed time to obtain instructions in that regard.� Following orders were passed in the matter on 08.05.2018: 
"Petitioners contend that by virtue of regulation 4(b) of the NCTE Notification dated 12.11.2014, the qualification for promotion is also prescribed. Contention is that the qualification prescribed in the first and second schedule to the notification would equally apply for direct recruitment and promotion. It is also stated that section 23 of the Act of 2009 talks of appointment which includes promotion also. 
Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the NCTE seeks short indulgence in order to obtain specific instruction from NCTE in that regard. 
Put up as fresh on 15.5.2018." 
Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel representing respondent - NCTE, on the basis of the instructions, states that the requirement contained in clause 4(b) of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014 would have to be met by a candidate before he is considered for promotion to the post of Headmaster / Headmistress of junior basic school and Assistant Teacher / Headmaster of senior basic school. � 
Shri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel representing the respondent no. 3 as well as District Basic Education Officer, initially, tried to raise an objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition at the instance of the present petitioners on the ground that they do not possess requisite eligibility for promotion to the posts in question and therefore, the writ petition, at their instance, be not entertained.� 
However, in view of the averments made in paragraph no. 10 of the writ petition as well as in view of proviso to rule 8(3), the objection of the respondents is not liable to be sustained; in as much as, in the absence of availability of requisite number of teachers with TET qualification, the respondents have the jurisdiction to relax the qualification prescribed under the relevant Rules.� Even otherwise, the petitioner no. 1 is shown to have completed three years working as Assistant Teacher.� So far as the petitioners' claim, on merit, is concerned, the respondents have not been able to dispute it, effectively.� No provision of law has been shown disputing the averments made on behalf of the petitioners.� 
In such view of the matter, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to act strictly in accordance with the clause 4(b) of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014 and to restrict the zone of consideration for promotion to Teachers / Headmaster / Headmistress who possess requisite TET qualification in terms of the clause 4 of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014.� It would further be appropriate to observe that in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others (2013 (6) ADJ 310), it is the qualification, contained in the NCTE notification, which would be relevant and would have to be scrupulously followed and the respondents cannot bank upon the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 alone to consider the claim of promotion. 
Order Date :- 15.5.2018 
Amit Mishra 




 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...

Monday, May 14, 2018

जबरदस्ती कुत्ते के साथ खेल रहा था मालिक, कुत्‍ते ने चला दी गोली ,मालिक ने पुलिस में शिकायत दर्ज कराई, कुत्ते के खिलाफ मुकदमा चलेगा

जबरदस्ती कुत्ते के साथ खेल रहा था मालिक, कुत्‍ते ने चला दी गोली ,मालिक ने पुलिस में शिकायत दर्ज कराई, कुत्ते के खिलाफ मुकदमा चलेगा



हैरान करने वाली यह घटना अमेरिका के अयोवा की है,
जहां एक मालिक रिचर्ड रेम्मे अपने कुत्ते के साथ जबरन खेल रहा था,
इसी खेल के दौरान कुत्ते ने पिस्टल का ट्रिगर दबा कर मालिक पर गोली चला दी, जिसकी शिकायत मालिक ने पुलिस स्टेशन में कर दी है, कुत्ते पर कानून के मुताबिक मुकदमा चलेगा।

कुत्ता क्रॉस ब्रीड बालेव था।

सिटी पुलिस चीफ रोजर पोर्टर के अनुसार कुत्‍ते द्वारा गोली मारने की यह पहली घटना है। ऐसी उन्होने पहले कभी नहीं सुना।


Visit for Amazing ,Must Read Stories, Information, Funny Jokes - http://7joke.blogspot.com 7Joke
संसार की अद्भुत बातों , अच्छी कहानियों प्रेरक प्रसंगों व् मजेदार जोक्स के लिए क्लिक करें...http://7joke.blogspot.com
Read more...

Sunday, May 13, 2018

News - 730 दिन की लगातार चाइल्ड केयर लीव ली जा सकती हैं, सुप्रीम कोर्ट -

News - 730 दिन की लगातार चाइल्ड केयर लीव ली जा सकती हैं, सुप्रीम कोर्ट  

Supreme Court of India
Kakali Ghosh vs Chief Secy. A & N Administration & ... on 15 April, 2014
Author: ………………………………………………….J.
Bench: Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, V. Gopala Gowda
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4506 OF 2014 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 33244 of 2012) KAKALI GHOSH … APPELLANT VERSUS CHIEF SECRETARY, ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ADMINISTRATION AND ORS. … RESPONDENTS J U D G M E N T
Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 18th September, 2012 passed by the High Court of Calcutta, Circuit Bench at Port Blair. By the impugned judgment, the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the judgment and order dated 30th April, 2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Calcutta, Circuit Bench at Port Blair (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Tribunal’).
3. The only question which requires to be determined in this appeal is whether a woman employee of the Central Government can ask for uninterrupted 730 days of Child Care Leave (hereinafter referred to as, - ‘the CCL’) under Rule 43-C of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Rules’).
4. The appellant initially applied for CCL for six months commencing from 5th July, 2011 by her letter dated 16th May, 2011 to take care of her son who was in 10th standard. In her application, she intimated that she is the only person to look after her minor son and her mother is a heart patient and has not recovered from the shock due to the sudden demise of her father; her father-in-law is almost bed ridden and in such circumstances, she was not in a position to perform her duties effectively. While her application was pending, she was transferred to Campbell Bay in Nicobar District (Andaman and Nicobar) where she joined on 06th July, 2011. By her subsequent letter dated 14th February, 2012 she requested the competent authority to allow her to avail CCL for two years commencing from 21st May, 2012. However, the authorities allowed only 45 days of CCL by their Office Order No. 254 dated 16th March, 2012.
5. Aggrieved appellant then moved before the Tribunal in O.A. No.47/A&N/2012 which allowed the application by order dated 30th April, 2012 with following observation:-
“12. Thus O.A. is allowed. Respondents are accordingly directed to act strictly in accordance with DOPT O.M. dated 11.9.2008 as amended/clarified on 29.9.2008 and 18.11.2008, granting her CCL for the due period. No costs.”
6. The order passed by the Tribunal was challenged by respondents before the Calcutta High Court which by impugned judgment and order dated 18th September, 2012 while observing that leave cannot be claimed as a right, held as follows:
“It is evident from the provisions of sub r.(3) of r.43-C of the rules that CCL can be granted only according to the conditions mentioned in the sub-rule, and that one of the conditions is that CCL shall not be granted for more than three spells in a calendar year. It means that CCL is not to be granted for a continuous period, but only in spells.
From the provisions of sub r.(3) of r.43-C of the rules it is also evident that a spell of CCL can be for as less as 16 days. This means that in a given case a person, though eligible to take CCL for a maximum period of 730 days, can be granted CCL in three spells in a calendar year for as less as 48 days.” The High Court further observed:
“Whether an eligible person should be granted CCL at all, and, if so, for what period, are questions to be decided by the competent authority; for the person is to work in the interest of public service, and ignoring public service exigencies that must prevail over private exigencies no leave can be granted.”
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is no bar to grant uninterrupted 730 days of CCL under Rule 43-C. The High Court was not justified in holding that CCL can be granted in three spells in a calendar year as less as 48 days at a time. It was also contended that the respondents failed to record ground to deny uninterrupted CCL to appellant for the rest of the period.
8. Per contra, according to respondents, Rule 43-C does not permit uninterrupted CCL for 730 days as held by the High Court.
9. Before we proceed to discuss the merits or otherwise of the above contentions, it will be necessary for us to refer the relevant Rule and the guidelines issued by the Government of India from time to time.
10. The Government of India from its Department of Personnel and Training vide O.M. No. 13018/2/2008-Estt. (L) dated 11th September, 2008 intimated that CCL can be granted for maximum period of 730 days during the entire service period to a woman government employee for taking care of up to two children, relevant portion of which reads as follows:
“(1) Child Care Leave for 730 days.
*** Women employees having minor children may be granted Child Care Leave by an authority competent to grant leave, for a maximum period of two years (i.e. 730 days) during their entire service for taking care of up to two children, whether for rearing or to look after any of their needs like examination, sickness, etc. Child Care Leave shall not be admissible if the child is eighteen years of age or older. During the period of such leave, the women employees shall be paid leave salary equal to the pay drawn immediately before proceeding on leave. It may be availed of in more than one spell. Child Care Leave shall not be debited against the leave account. Child Care Leave may also be allowed for the third year as leave not due (without production of medical certificate). It may be combined with leave of the kind due and admissible.”
11. It was followed by Circular issued by Government of India from its Personnel and Training Department vide O.M. No. 13018/2/2008- Estt. (L), dated 29th September, 2008 by which it was clarified that CCL would be also admissible to a woman government employee to look after third child below 18 years of age, which is as follows:
“(2) Clarifications:-
The question as to whether child care leave would be admissible for the third child below the age of 18 years and the procedure for grant of child care leave have been under consideration in this Department, and it has now been decided as follows:-
i) Child Care Leave shall be admissible for two eldest surviving children only.
ii) The leave account for child care leave shall be maintained in the pro forma enclosed, and it shall be kept along with the Service Book of the Government Servant concerned.”
12. Rule 43-C was subsequently inserted by Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training, Notification No. F.No. 11012/1/2009- Estt. (L) dated 1st December, 2009, published in G.S.R. No. 170 in the Gazette of India dated 5th December, 2009 giving effect from 1st September, 2008 as quoted below:-
“43-C. Child Care Leave
1) A women Government servant having minor children below the age of eighteen years and who has no earned leave at her credit, may be granted child care leave by an authority competent to grant leave, for a maximum period of two years, i.e. 730 days during the entire service for taking care of up to two children, whether for rearing or to look after any of their needs like examination, sickness, etc.
2) During the period of child care leave, she shall be paid leave salary equal to the pay drawn immediately before proceeding on leave.
3) Child care leave may be combined with leave of any other kind.
4) Notwithstanding the requirement of production of medical certificate contained in sub-rule (1) of Rule 30 or sub-rule (1) of Rule 31, leave of the kind due and admissible (including commuted leave not exceeding 60 days and leave not due) up to a maximum of one year, if applied for, be granted in continuation with child care leave granted under sub-rule (1).
5) Child care leave may be availed of in more than one spell.
6) Child care leave shall not be debited against the leave account.”
13. On perusal of circulars and Rule 43-C, it is apparent that a woman government employee having minor children below 18 years can avail CCL for maximum period of 730 days i.e. during the entire service period for taking care of upto two children. The care of children is not for rearing the smaller child but also to look after any of their needs like examination, sickness etc. Sub Rule (3) of Rule 43-C allows woman government employee to combine CCL with leave of any other kind. Under Sub Rule (4) of Rule 43- C leave of the kind due and admissible to woman government employee including commuted leave not exceeding 60 days; leave not due up to a maximum of one year, can be applied for and granted in continuation with CCL granted under Sub Rule (1). From plain reading of Sub Rules (3) and (4) of Rule 43-C it is clear that CCL even beyond 730 days can be granted by combining other leave if due. The finding of the High Court is based neither on Rule 43-C nor on guidelines issued by the Central Government. The Tribunal was correct in directing the respondents to act strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government of India and Rule 43-C.
14. In the present case, the appellant claimed for 730 days of CCL at a stretch to ensure success of her son in the forthcoming secondary/senior examinations (10th/11th standard). It is not in dispute that son was minor below 18 years of age when she applied for CCL. This is apparent from the fact that the competent authority allowed 45 days of CCL in favour of the appellant. However, no reason has been shown by the competent authority for disallowing rest of the period of leave.
15. Leave cannot be claimed as of right as per Rule 7, which reads as follows:
“7. Right to leave (1) Leave cannot be claimed as of right.
(2) When the exigencies of public service so require, leave of any kind may be refused or revoked by the authority competent to grant it, but it shall not be open to that authority to alter the kind of leave due and applied for except at the written request of the Government servant.” However, under Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 7 leave can be refused or revoked by the competent authority in the case of exigencies of public service.
16. In fact, Government of India from its Ministry of Home Affairs and Department of Personnel and Training all the time encourage the government employees to take leave regularly, preferably annually by its Circular issued by the Government of India M.H.A.O.M. No. 6/51/60-Ests. (A), dated 25th January, 1961, reiterated vide Government of India letter dated 22/27th March, 2001. As per those circulars where all applications for leave cannot, in the interest of public service, be granted at the same time, the leave sanctioning authority may draw up phased programme for the grant of leave to the applicants by turn with due regard to the principles enunciated under the aforesaid circulars.
17. In the present case the respondents have not shown any reason to refuse 730 days continuous leave. The grounds taken by them and as held by High Court cannot be accepted for the reasons mentioned above.
18. For the reasons aforesaid, we set aside the impugned judgment dated 18th September, 2012 passed by the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Port Blair and affirm the judgment and order dated 30th April, 2012 passed by the Tribunal with a direction to the respondents to comply with the directions issued by the Tribunal within three months from the date of receipt/production of this judgment.
19. The appeal is allowed with aforesaid directions. No costs.
………………………………………………….J.
(SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA) ……………………………………………….J.
(V. GOPALA GOWDA) NEW DELHI, APRIL 15, 2014.




 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...

News - अमेरिका से चाइल्ड केयर लीव का ई मेल भेजा, ई मेल पर कोई निर्णय नही लेने पर कोर्ट ने इसे चाइल्ड केयर लीव माना , देखें आदेश -

News - अमेरिका से चाइल्ड केयर लीव का ई मेल भेजा, ई मेल पर कोई निर्णय नही लेने पर कोर्ट ने इसे चाइल्ड केयर लीव माना , देखें आदेश 



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 

?Court No. - 29 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12762 of 2011 
Petitioner :- Dr. Nutan Mishra 
Respondent :- Basant College For Women And Others 
Petitioner Counsel :- Bhoopendra Nath Singh,Devendra Pratap Singh 
Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C.,K.S. Chauhan 

Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J. 
Hon'ble Mrs. Jayashree Tiwari,J. 
Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent no. 2. Shri K.S. Chauhan has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.2. Issue notice to respondent no. 1. Steps within a week. The respondents are allowed four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. The petitioner will have one week thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. 
List on 19.4.2011. 
The petitioner has prayed for directions to quash the letter of the Manager, Vasanta College for Women, Varanasi dated 4.9.2010, by which in response to petitioner's e-mail dated 24.7.2010 sent by her from United States, the College has treated the petitioner to have abandoned the job. She has also prayed for payment of full salary and other service benefits. 
It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner is M.A. in Sociology with first division from Lucknow University and has passed NET. She served as Lecturer in I.T. College, Lucknow; after which she was appointed as Lecturer in Sociology in the respondent no.1, College on 8.2.2006, and was confirmed after one year. In the year 2007 she got married and gave birth to a baby girl on 3.11.2008 in United States, where her husband is working. On return to India she was looking after her baby and also her mother, who was ill at Varanasi. 
It is stated that at Varanasi the baby got sick. In the summer vacations in the College in June, 2010,� the petitioner left for United States to get enough time to build the immunes system of the baby, so that the petitioner can work stress free, when she joins back. She requested the College to understand her situation and to grant her leave to take care of her child� by e-mail dated 20.7.2010. 
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission in para 5.12.4 for maternity and paternity leave, which provides for women teachers having minor children to be allowed leave upto two years for taking care of their children. The Commission has also made recommendations as follows:- 
"Para 5:12:4: Maternity/Paternity Leave 
Maternity leave may now be granted to a female teacher for 180 days present leave days and only twice in one's career. Likewise a paternity leave of 15 day may be granted to a teacher father. 
It has also been suggested that women teachers having minor children may be allowed leave up two year for taking care of their children. In yet another suggestion, the women teachers have demanded leave for 2 to 3 years for bringing up children or joining their husbands. 
The Committee recommends that child care leave for and maximum period of 2 year (730 days) may be allowed to the women teachers during entire service period in line with central government women employees." 
Prima facie we find that the College, instead of considering petitioner's application for leave, has come to an understanding as stated in the impugned letter that she has abandoned her teaching post as she did not return back for duties within the stipulated time. 
The petitioner should have given full and complete facts regarding the date of birth of her baby, the period for which she was absent from teaching duties and whether the University has accepted the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission, and has also not applied for leave in a proper way. 
We find that the College has not taken any decision on her request for leave sent by her vide e-mail, which ought to have been treated as child care leave. A letter, by which the Committee of Management has understood that she had abandoned teaching post, does not take into account the request to grant her leave. The abandonement can be inferred where the person is not reporting for work and has not applied for leave. In the present case, since the petitioner had applied for leave, even if it was not a proper way, the Committee should have considered the request. 
As an interim measure, we direct that if the petitioner applies for leave within a period of 15 days, the Committee of Management will consider her leave application in the light of the rules for leave, applicable in the College and also the recommendation of 6th Pay Commission, if they have been accepted by the Banaras Hindu University (a Central University). The petitioner will also give an indication as to when she would like to join. She will, however, not be paid salary until the management takes a decision on her leave application. 
Order Date :- 3.3.2011 RKP 



 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 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,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 
Read more...