सरकारी नौकरी शिक्षक भर्ती/नियुक्ति परिणाम / टीईटी Sarkari Naukri Recruitment/Appointment Result. Latest/Updated News - UPTET, CTET, BETET, RTET, APTET, TET (Teacher Eligibility Test) Merit/Counselling for Primary Teacher(PRT) of various state government including UP, Bihar
Surplus Teacher News -16 मई 2018 के कोर्ट आदेश में कहा गया की समायोजन पर स्टे चलता रहा और जारी है, क्या राज्य सरकार कोई नई ट्रांसफर पॉलिसी ला रही है और कब तक - 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 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?
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. 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. Order Date :- 16.5.2018 Ashok Kr. UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | 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,
Surplus Teacher News - कोर्ट ने कहा कि सिर्फ एक साइंस टीचर हो तो उसका समायोजन नहीं किया जाए, यह सही नही है, अंतिम आदेश मे नई ट्रांसफर पॉलिसी का जिक्र किया है -
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. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 17 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,Radha Kant Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. 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. Order Date :- 31.7.2017 Digamber UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | 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,
News - लखीमपुर से हरदोई ट्रांसफर लेने के बाद महिला याची को 48 km दूर स्कूल पोस्टिंग पर याचिका, याची का हाल ही में बच्चा हुआ है , district hq के नजदीक स्थानान्तरण की याचिका, कोर्ट ने 3 हफ्ते के अंदर महिला की फरियाद पर फैसला लेने को कहा
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 23 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 23836 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shivani Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Anurag Shukla. Learned Chief Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4. Sri Ajay Kumar, learned Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 2. The petitioner has rushed to this Court challenging the order of transfer dated 9.7.2018 passed by District Basic Education Officer whereby the petitioner was transfered from District Lakhimpur Kheri to District Hardoi. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was selected by a duly constituted selection committee on the post of Assistant Teacher and was posted vide order dated 23.11.2015 at primary school Hussainapur, Block Pasigawan, District Kheri (Lakhimpur). He next submitted that in pursuance to the Government Order issued by the State Government in regard to the inter district transfer, the petitioner applied for and opted district Hardoi for the transfer and thereafter, vide order dated 13.6.2018, petitioner was transferred to District Hardoi wherein she reported in the office of District Basic Education Officer on 26.7.2018. His next submission is that the petitioner is having newly born baby and in this regard she filed a representation before the District Basic Education Officer for consideration of her claim for posting in nearby primary school from the district headquarter. In spite of considering the claim of the petitioner, the impugned transfer order has been passed whereby the petitioner is posted in an institution which is about 48 Km. away from the district headquarter and there is no facility of conveyance regularly and in reaching the institution she has to change conveyance in three times. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner for ventilating her grievances has approached the District Basic Education Officer vide applications dated 24.7.2018 and 13.8.2018 to consider her claim on sympathetic ground for posting in nearby institution from the headquarter. The petitioner in paragraph 22 of the writ petition has pointed out the name of the institution wherein post of Assistant Teacher is lying vacant. On the other hand learned Standing counsel and learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 have no objection in case the writ petition is disposed of with direction to consider the claim of the petitioner. In view of the above, the writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation along with certified copy of the order as well as copy of the writ petition within a week from today. In case such representation is filed by the petitioner before the respondent no. 3, who is Chairman of District Level Committee, he will consider and pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order within a period of three weeks thereafter. Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Manoj UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | 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,
InterDistrict Transfer News - ट्रांसफर क़्वालिटी पॉइंट में गड़बड़ी को लेकर याची ने कंटेम्प्ट लगाया, विभाग को क़्वालिटी पॉइंट की लिस्ट पेश करने को कहा -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 19 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3582 of 2018 Applicant :- Smt. Renu Gupta Opposite Party :- Sri Sanjay Sinha, Secretary Basic Education Board Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Verma Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Put up alongwith leading contempt application No. 3371 of 2018 on the date already fixed in the said case i.e. 29.08.2018.� The opposite party shall file separate affidavit in the instant case annexing therewith list of candidates, who had been transferred in various district to which the applicant had been seeking transfer, showing quality point marks awarded to them as well as to the applicant. (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 20.8.2018 Darpan Sharma UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | 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,
News - सरप्लस शिक्षकों का फ्रेश निर्धारण किया जा चुका है, इसलिए विभाग चाहे तो ट्रांसफर कर सकता है, कोर्ट का आदेश -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10799 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar And 9 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Khare,Sr. Advocate Shri Ashok Khare Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J. The first exercise to determine the surplus teachers was carried out in the year 2017. The said determination as well as transfer orders are subject matter of challenge before this Court in the present writ petition. Shri Sanjay Aggrawal, Additional Chief Secretary, State of U.P. has filed his personal affidavit in pursuance of orders dated 28.05.2018 and 14.05.2018 of this Court. In paragraph 5 of the said affidavit, it is specifically mentioned that fresh exercise of determining surplus teachers in Kanpur Nagar has been carried out. In view of the aforesaid, the earlier determination of surplus teachers and transfer orders do not survive. The respondents and the authorities concerned are at liberty to issue posting orders as per fresh determination carried out by them for Kanpur Nagar. The respondents are at liberty to post the surplus teachers in other institutions as per requirement and as per the provisions of the Right to Education Act, 2009. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Rahul. UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | 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,
UPTETShiksha Mitra News - शिक्षा मित्रों की रिट खारिज, याचिका थी कि नियमित शिक्षक के बराबर वेतनमान दिया जाए ,हाईकोर्ट ने कहा कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट पहले ही फैसला दे चुकी है , फिक्स्ड 10 हज़ार रुपये मानदेय मानने की शर्तों के अधीन नोकरी कर रहे हो और उसी को चैलेंज, याचिका खारिज In view of the above, the petitioners were provided appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra on contractual basis on the fixed honorarium of Rs. 10,000/-. Thus, challenge of the same Government Order, whereby they were provided engagement on the post of Shiksha Mitra, is not permissible in law. Accordingly, the writ petition being misconceived is hereby dismissed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 23 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 23683 of 2018 Petitioner :- Bhola Prasad Shukla And Ors. Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Human Resources Devp. And Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Dileep Kumar Misra,Neelesh Kumar,Pawan Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.M. Tripathi,A.S.G.,Sudhanshu Chauhan Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J. Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no. 1 which may be taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Chief Standing counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 5. Sri Sudhanshu Chauhan, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 2. Sri A.M. Tripathi, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 4. The petitioners have challenged the vires of the Government Order dated 20.9.2017 whereby the State Government resolved to reinstate the Shiksha Mitra in the entire State in Primary Schools run and managed by the Board of Basic Education. The Shiksha Mitra appointed under the aforesaid Government Order are entitled for the payment of honorarium of Rs. 10,000/- per month. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are Shiksha Mitra having graduation degree with training qualification, therefore,� they are entitled to get salary of Rs. 38878/- and to continue for the period of 12 months as per the Minutes of Meeting approved on 22nd April, 2016 by the respondents. His next submission is that in illegal and arbitrary manner, the Shiksha Mitra, who are having qualification of Intermediate have also been given same pay scale as has been provided to the petitioners which are arbitrary and discriminatory in nature. His next submission is that the meeting dated 22nd April, 2016 is the meeting of the Central Government, which provided aid under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, wherein Shiksha Mitra are appointed by the State of U.P. in the primary schools, up to the level of 65%, therefore, minutes of meeting are binding upon the State Government. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the writ petition is misconceived writ petition. The Government Order dated 20.9.2017 was issued in compliance of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. and other Vs. Anand Kumar Yadav passed in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 32599 of 2015 decided on 25.7.2017 thus does not require interference by this Court. His next submission is that the petitioners are granted appointment under the aforesaid Government Order, therefore, the petitioners have no right to challenge the Government Order dated 20.9.2017 in entirety. The salary which are being demanded by the petitioners are not admissible to the Shiksha Mitra appointed under the scheme of the Government on contractual basis on a fixed honorarium, after declaration of the absorption of Shisha Mitra to be illegal being de-hors the rules. Next submission of learned counsel for the respondents is that the claim of the petitioners for the payment of honorarium of Rs. 38878/- is not permissible in law. Thus, the writ petition being misconceived is liable to be dismissed. After having heard the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties I perused the record of the writ petition. The petitioners are Shiksha Mitra working in the different primary schools of District Basti. The petitioners without examining the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 32599 of 2015 (State of U.P. and other Vs. Anand Kumar Yadav) decided on 25.7.2017 have proceeded to challenge the Government Order dated 20.9.2018. The Government Order dated 20.9.2017 has been issued in compliance of the judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court giving appointment to them on sympathetic ground by the State Government. Paragraph 25 and 26 of the judgement dated 25.7.2017 are quoted herein below :- "25. On the one hand, we have the claim of 1.78 Lakhs persons to be regularized in violation of law, on the other hand is the duty to uphold the rule of law and also to have regard to the right of children in the age of 6 to 14 years to receive quality education from duly qualified teachers. Thus, even if for a stop gap arrangement teaching may be by unqualified teachers, qualified teachers have to be ultimately appointed. It may be permissible to give some weightage to the experience of Shiksha Mitras or some age relaxation may be possible, mandatory qualifications cannot be dispensed with. Regularization of Shiksha Mitras as teachers was not permissible. In view of this legal position, our answers are obvious. We do not find any error in the view taken by the High Court. 26. Question now is whether in absence of any right in favour of Shiksha Mitras, they are entitled to any other relief or preference. In the peculiar fact situation, they ought to be given opportunity to be considered for recruitment if they have acquired or they now acquire the requisite qualification in terms of advertisements for recruitment for next two consecutive recruitments. They may also be given suitable age relaxation and some weightage for their experience as may be decided by the concerned authority. Till they avail of this opportunity, the State is at liberty to continue them as Shiksha Mitras on same terms on which they were working prior to their absorption, if the State so decides." The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgement referred herein above considered each and every aspect of the matter and has held that the absorption of the Shiksha Mitra in the State of Uttar Pradesh is in violation of law. The provisions contained under the right to free and compulsory education of the children in the age of 6 to 14 years to receive the quality of education and appointment of qualified teachers is to be take care of by the State machinery. Thus, even if for a staff gap arrangement teaching is imparted by unqualified teachers, the purpose of Right To Free And Compulsory Education Act, 2009 amended under Article 29(A) of the Constitution of India shall not be served.� Thereafter, on the facts and circumstances direction was issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to give opportunity for consideration of recruitment, if they have acquired or they now acquire the requisite qualification or in terms of advertisement for recruitment some age relaxation and waightage for their experience be provided for next two consecutive recruitment. In view of the above, the petitioners were provided appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra on contractual basis on the fixed honorarium of Rs. 10,000/-. Thus, challenge of the same Government Order, whereby they were provided engagement on the post of Shiksha Mitra, is not permissible in law. Accordingly, the writ petition being misconceived is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 20.8.2018 Manoj UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,
CTET - 3 दिनों के अंंदर बी एड अभ्यर्थी भी CTET 1 प्राइमरी लेवल परीक्षा देने के पात्र हो जाएंगे, NCTE सौंपेगी गाइडलाइन CBSE CTET को, इस आदेश के साथ कोर्ट कार्यवाही समाप्त हुई -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16920 of 2018 Petitioner :- Bhanu Pratap Yadav And Another Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh Tripathi,Dhananjay Awasthi,Hridai Narain Pandey Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J. Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for the NCTE submits that necessary guidelines shall be issued within a period of three days directing the concerned authority to include the B.Ed. as qualifying degree for the candidates to appear in the examination to be conducted for appointment as Primary Teachers. In view of the aforesaid undertaking before this Court, the petitioner will not have any grievance further to maintain this petition. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the NCTE, this petition is finally disposed of. Needless to say that if the applications are submitted by the candidates, who have B.Ed. degree, before the last date, their applications shall be considered. Order Date :- 20.8.2018 NSC
UPTET News - BTC जिस जिलेे के अभ्यर्थी हैैं, उस जिलेे में वरीयता देंने की याचिका -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10587 of 2018 Petitioner :- Avanish Kumar And 15 Others Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Anil Kumar Singh Bishen,Tarun Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Verma Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ-A No.10587 of 2018 submits as under: (i) Those candidates who have passed B.T.C. from a particular district, should be given preference in appointment on the post of assistant teacher in that particular district. (ii) The circular dated 20.12.2016 is contrary to Rule 14 of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 inasmuch as the applications may be invited from eligible candidates from the concerned districts. Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare and Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsels for the petitioners in other writ petitions, jointly submit that the petitioners belong to such district where there were no vacant posts. Therefore, they have a right to apply and accordingly they applied against the vacancies advertised in other districts. They were allowed to participate in the counselling and thereafter they were selected. Further, in a matter arising from the district Gonda, being Service Single No.11375 of 2018 (Ram Janak Maurya And Ors. vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Basic Education And Ors., an interim order dated 19.04.2018 was passed by Lucknow Bench of this Court directing the authority concerned not to issue appointment letters to candidates of different districts in which the post was advertised. They further submit that there is no bar under the Rules, 1981 that candidates of other districts may not apply against the vacancies advertised in a particular district. In view of the interim order passed by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition relating to district Gonda, another Bench of this court in Writ-A No.12056 of 2018 (Abhishek Dixit And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others), passed an interim order dated 18.05.2018, as under: "A statement is made by Shri Vivek Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, on the basis of the instructions received from the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad, that no appointment letters would be issued till the matter is pending before the Lucknow Bench in Special Appeal No. 205 of 2018 (Mohit Kumar Dwivedi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others), which is being heard on day-to-day basis. In that view of the matter, let this writ petition be listed, along with the records of Writ A No. 10587 of 2018 (Avanish Kumar and 15 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others) and other connected matters, on 24th of May, 2018. " The Special Appeal No.205 of 2018 which was the basis to pass afore-quoted interim order dated 18.05.2018, was disposed of by the Division Bench by order dated 25.05.2018, as under: "The above three intra court appeals filed under Chapter-VIII, Rule-5 of the Rules of the Court have assailed the correctness of the interim order dated 19th April, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Service Single No.11375 of 2018 (Ram Janak Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others). The interim order dated 19th April, 2018 is reproduced below:- "Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Notices for opposite party Nos.1 & 2 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel, whereas notices for opposite party Nos.3 & 4 have been accepted by Sri Vindhyavashini Kumar, learned counsel. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have submitted that the Basic Education Board, Allahabad and the District Basic Education Officer, Gonda be directed to prepare fresh cut off marks after first round of counselling by excluding the persons who had obtained B.T.C. Training from outside the District-Gonda and accordingly a fresh cut off of first round of counselling will be declared in pursuance of Government Orders dated 15.12.2018 and 11.04.2018 and the notification of the Basic Education Board dated 26.12.2016, 02.03.2017 and 16.04.2018 for appointment of 12,460 posts of Assistant Teachers by allowing only the persons who had completed B.T.C. Training from the District-Gonda only and outsiders to be allowed in subsequent rounds of counselling only as per policy of the State Government reflected in counter affidavit filed by it in Writ Petition No.10131 (M/B) of 2015; Om Prakash Singh & others vs. State of U.P. As per learned counsel for the petitioners, the notification has been issued in the Newspaper dated 19.04.2018, whereby the date for verification of the original documents has been fixed for 23.04.2018 i.e. on Monday. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, as aforesaid, requires consideration. Therefore, the competent authority is directed to verify the original documents of the candidates pursuant to the notification dated 18.04.2018, published in the Newspaper on 19.04.2018, but the appointment letter of the candidates, who obtained B.T.C. Training other than the District-Gonda shall not be issued, till the next date of listing and if it is required, it may be issued after seeking leave from the Court. Learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos.3 & 4 pray for and are granted two weeks' time to file their respective counter affidavits. List this case in the week commencing 07.05.2018 as fresh along with other connected matters." We have heard Sri Anil Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Durga Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants in Special Appeal No.205 of 2018, Dr. L.P. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in Special Appeal No.212 of 2018 and Sri Himanshu Raghav, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in Special Appeal No.206 of 2018, Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents in all the three appeals, Sri Gaurav Mehrotra and Ms. Ishita Yadu, learned counsel appearing for the intervenors- Siddharth Shukla and two others, Sri O.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the intervenor- Alok Kumar Singh and Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel representing the U.P. Basic Education, Board and Sri Ramesh Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. The private respondents herein filed the Writ Petition No.11375 (S/S) of 2018 claiming the following reliefs:- "Whereof, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set-aside the judgment and order dated 19.04.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in Writ Petition No.11375 [S/S] of 2018- Ram Janak Maurya and others Vs. State of U.P. and others- and further the respondents 1 to 4 may be directed to issue the appointment letter to the appellant notwithstanding the impugned order dated 19.04.2018, or such other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed." Before the learned Single Judge, the argument advanced was that the candidates from zero vacancy districts, although were permitted to give their first preference district for applying for appearing in the counseling for Assistant Teachers, they had done the B.T.C. training other than the District Gonda, cannot be equated to the petitioners therein, who had done their B.T.C.training from district-Gonda and the claim of the zero vacancy districts candidates would only be liable to be considered after the counseling of the petitioners who had done their B.T.C. from District-Gonda. Reliance had been placed upon certain Rules framed under the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and relevant Government Orders in that regard. The learned Single Judge, after noticing the arguments in brief, granted an interim order to the effect that the appointment letters to such candidates, who were from districts other than Gonda i.e. from the zero vacancy districts and had given their first preference for district Gonda, may not be issued till the next date of listing and further gave liberty that if it is required to be issued the same may be done only on seeking leave from the Court. The learned Single Judge had fixed 7th May, 2018 for the matter to be taken up as fresh, along with other connected matters and had also granted the respondents two weeks time to file their respective counter-affidavits. Before us, learned counsels appearing for the appellants have raised the following arguments, firstly that the writ petition itself was not maintainable, inasmuch as, the petitioner therein had participated in the counseling, which was held in March, 2017 and after waiting for more than a year when they were found that they were lower in merit than the candidates from the zero vacancy district therein, and therefore the change in the stand after finding themselves unsuccessful would not be tenable in law as settled by various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and This Court. Next argument raised was that the petitioners knowing fully well that the candidates from districts other than the Gonda i.e. zero vacancy districts who were higher in merit as against them, were not impleaded in the petition, as such, the petition was liable to be thrown out for non-joinder of necessary parties. Another argument raised was that the learned Single Judge did not record the basic ingredients required for passing an injunction order i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss, as such, the order passed by the learned Single Judge was vitiated. Plethora of judgments have been placed before us by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants on the above arguments raised. On the other hand, learned counsels for the respondents have vehemently urged that the present Intra-Court appeals are not maintainable against an interim order and therefore they are liable to be dismissed. It is also submitted on behalf of the respondents that the learned Single Judge had only passed an interim order limited in duration and also granted liberty to apply for leave of the court in case the appointment orders of others were to be issued. In our considered opinion, issues need to be first addressed by the learned Single Judge before we take up these matters in the intra court appellate jurisdiction. The Writ Court can always decide about it's jurisdiction to the maintainability of the petition and also for modifying or vacating the interim order. Thus, we are not inclined to interfere in this Intra-Court appeals. It would be open to the appellants to apply for impleadment, apply for vacation of the interim order, apply for modification of the interim order and raise all possible arguments, as may be permissible under law, before the learned Single Judge. It is made clear that writ petitioners will not raise any objection before the learned Single Judge with regard to the impleadment of the candidates, who may be adversely affected by the outcome of the writ petition. We further request the learned Single Judge that in case stay vacation application, impleadment application or modification application, as the case may be, are filed by the appellants, the same may be taken up expeditiously and subject to other matters on Board, may be decided at the earliest. With the above observations these appeals stand disposed of." In view of the aforesaid, both the learned senior advocates submit that there is no legal impediment to hear and decide this batch of writ petitions finally. Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that U.P. Basic Education Board has taken a decision on 26.12.2016 that candidates of other districts shall also be permitted to participate in the counselling and they shall have a right to be appointed. He supports the said decision. As prayed, put up in the Additional Cause List on 13.08.2018, along with all connected writ petitions. Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assures the court that till the next date fixed, the interest of the petitioners shall not be adversely affected by giving appointment to others. Order Date :- 1.8.2018 NLY UPTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com http://joinuptet.blogspot.com Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTETUptet | 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,
