Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35878 of 2018 Petitioner :- Balram Krishna Pandey And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anuj Srivastava,Devaang Savla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.,Dhananjay Awasthi
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Piyush Tripathi for the respondent no. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have come up praying for certiorari to quash the notification dated 28th June, 2018 as ultravires in so far as it excludes B.Ed. (Special Education) as the minimum qualification for appointment of Assistant Teacher in Primary Basic Schools which is prescribed as Graduation with atleast 50% marks and Bachelor of Education. Further one who has acquired the qualification of Bachelor of Education from a NCTE Recognized Institution shall be considered for appointment as a teacher for Classes-I to V provided the person so appointed as a teacher shall mandatorily undergo a six months Bridge Course in Elementary Education recognized by the NCTE within two years of such appointment as a primary teacher.
The petitioners before us are not holders of the regular B.Ed. degree. They are holders of B.Ed. degree in Special Education. Their contention is that there is no valid reason to exclude the qualification of the petitioners for consideration for such appointment, and consequently, the prayer, as made, is to declare the provision ultravires and also to quash the Government order dated 14th September, 2018 that has been issued for the purpose of such recruitment. A further prayer has been made to include the said qualification, namely, the certificate of B.Ed. (Special Education) as a training qualification for the purpose of TET Examination, 2018.
Having considered the same, what we find is that the petitioners have relied on interim orders dated 12.10.2018 and 04.10.2018 respectively passed by a learned Single Judge and by a Division Bench permitting such candidates who are in possession of similar degrees to provisionally appear in the Teacher Eligibility Test.
In our considered opinion, the issue of granting equivalence or treating the degrees possessed by the petitioners as equivalent to the B.Ed. regular degree is within the realm of expertise of the respondent no. 3. Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the said respondent submits that an appropriate decision shall be taken by the said respondents with regard to any such claim as according to him the recommendation made by the Rehabilitation Council of India on which reliance has been placed by the petitioners is a mere request and is not binding on the National Council for Teachers Education.
We agree with the aforesaid submission of Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, and therefore, we are not inclined to entertain this petition and keep it pending for the simple reason that this decision of equivalence has to be taken by the respondent no. 3.
We, accordingly, dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to pass appropriate orders with regard to any such claim of equivalence within a period of three weeks from today and inform the petitioners accordingly.
Disposed of with the said directions.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 S.Chaurasia