Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10628 of 2018 Petitioner :- Aditya Narain Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary (Basic Shiksha Parishad) And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Sahai,Suraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Father of the petitioner late Tribhuwan Narain Singh was a head master in 'Primary School Pandit Pura Shiksha Chhetra Chilkahar, District Ballia'. He died in harness on 7.7.2012. Petitioner being the son of the deceased, moved an application for grant of compassionate appointment on 15.12.2015. Such application of the petitioner has been examined by the authorities and ultimately appointment on Class-IV post has been offered to him by the District Basic Education officer, Ballia on 16.11.2017, which is under challenge in the present petition. It is contended that the petitioner possesses the qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher and, therefore, the authorities were not justified in offering him Class-IV post.
Petitioner is a post graduate and has also done his B.Ed. He has also passed CTET. Question is as to whether petitioner is eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in a primary institution.
Appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in a primary school is regulated by the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981. Rule-8 specifies the qualification required for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher, which is graduation alongwith BTC or equivalent training qualification. A Full Bench of this Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (6), 310, has interpreted Rule-8 to hold that qualification prescribed under the NCTE Regulation would prevail over the qualification prescribed in the Rules.The NCTE has issued a notification on 23.8.2010, which provides for the qualification required for appointment to the post of teacher for Classes I to V. Relevant portion of the notification is reproduced:-
"1. Minimum Qualification.-
(i) Classes I-V
(a) Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50 % marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known) OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 45% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure), Regulations 2002 OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.) OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Education (Special Education) AND
(b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.
AND (b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose." (emphasis supplied)."
Sri Sanjay Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in terms of NCTE Regulation inasmuch as petitioner is not a TET, which is the training qualification required for Classes I to V and that CTET qualification is permissible only for teaching to Classes VI to VIII. It is also stated that the B. Ed. qualification is not a valid qualification for teacher of Classes I to V.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, submits that the petitioner could be appointed either as trainee teacher or as Assistant Teacher in terms of the Government Order dated 4.9.2000, where after petitioner be given an opportunity to acquire BTC training.
Before this Court proceeds to examine the issue, it would be appropriate to notice that the petitioner is claiming compassionate appointment. Law is settled that grant of compassionate appointment is not a matter of right and is merely a concession offered in order to tide over the sudden financial difficulties faced by the family on account of death of sole bread earner for the family. Petitioner, therefore, cannot claim appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher, as a matter of right.
The institution, herein, is a primary institution, imparting instructions from Classes I to V. There is no post of trainee teacher in the institution. So far as the Government Order of the year 2000 is concerned, there is no reason as to why it be pressed into service in aid of petitioner, when appointment claimed is not a matter of right. Moreover a subsequent government order has been issued on 12.6.2012 whereby the appointment of untrained teacher has been discontinued. The government Order dated 4.9.2000 cannot be pressed now. The respondents are, therefore, right in contending that requisite qualification in terms of the NCTE qualification is not possessed by the petitioner. In such circumstances, if the respondents have proceeded to offer compassionate appointment on Class-IV post, no illegality can be attributed to the decision taken. The view taken by this Court finds support from the observation made in Special Appeal No. 1467 of 2012, which is reproduced:-
"The learned Judge has elaborately dealt with the issue in the light of the provisions of the Act and the Rules and examined whether it was permissible to appoint an untrained teacher on compassionate grounds by granting relaxation dehors the eligibility criteria provided under the 2009 Act. In this context, the learned Judge observed that in the Government Order providing for compassionate appointment would have to give way to the fixation of minimum qualification in Act and the Rules. The appellants had been appointed on temporary basis. They would, therefore, have no right to continue if their appointments were made dehors the Rules. The decision relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants in Comptroller and Auditor General of India would, therefore, be of no help to the appellants.
In this view of the matter, when the appointments of the petitioners were clearly dehors the statutory provisions, the learned Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition.
The Special Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed".
The Division Bench had also noticed that the Government Order dated 4.9.2000 would loose its sanctity after the subsequent Government Order dated 12.6.2012, as per which, the policy of appointing untrained teacher was entirely done away with.
Writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.4.2018 n.u.