Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 25102 of 2018 Petitioner :- Rekha Pal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Shyam Shankar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K. Yadav
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
1. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. According to the petitioners, they were selected against the advertisement issued in the year 2016 for recruitment on the post of Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic School run by Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad. Since, they were having two years Diploma in Education from State of Madhya Pradesh which was duly recognized qualification as per National Council of Teachers Education (NCTE) notification, however, since State of U.P. adopted it later on, they were denied appointment on not being possessing the requisite qualification.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the controversy earlier travelled to this Court in Writ - A No. 47490 of 2017, Km. Pallavi v. State of U.P. & Others decided on 12.12.2017 in which this Court passed the following order in the conclusive para of the judgment which runs as under:
"The Full Bench of this Court, as well as, the Supreme Court, in the decisions referred to in the order dated 12 October 2017, leaves no room for doubt that the competent authority to determine the essential qualifications for appointment of teachers in primary schools throughout the country, is vested with the N.C.T.E. The notification dated 27 November 2017 merely incorporates what is otherwise mandated by law, therefore, the notifications issued by the N.C.T.E., would apply from the date, on which the qualification was notified by the N.C.T.E. and not from the date on which the N.C.T.E. notifications was incorporated in the State Act or Rules governing appointment and selection of primary teachers.
The learned Additional Advocate General would submit that the respondents undertake to follow the qualifications prescribed by the N.C.T.E., from time to time, however, the order, in the facts of the case be confined only to the petitioners who are before the Court in the present petition and the batch of writ petitions. In case, the order is made applicable to persons who have not approached the Court, as yet, it would be difficult for the second respondent, Uttar Pradesh Board of Basic Education, Allahabad, to consider their cases, for the reason that the process of selection and appointment has since been concluded.
In regard thereto, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher in terms of the N.C.T.E. notifications, expeditiously, within two months from date, provided there is no other impediment.
No cost."
4. It is further contended that in compliance of the judgment of this Court, the Secretary, U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad has issued circular letter to all the District Basic Education Officer of State of U.P. on 13.02.2018 and the operative portion of the circular letter runs as under:
^^vr,o vuqjks/k gS fd ek0 mPp U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 12-12-2017 ds vuqikyu eas fjV ;kfpdk la[;k&47490@2017 dq0 iYyoh o vU; cuke m0iz0 jkT; ,oa vU; lEc) fjV ;kfpdkvkas eas lfEefyr ;kph vH;fFkZ;ksa dks 16448 lgk;d v/;kidkas dh HkrhZ izfd;k eas lfEefyr djrs gq, muds izf'k{k.k ;ksX;rk ds lEcU/k eas ,u0lh0Vh0bZ0 dh vf/klpw uk fnukad 23-08-2010] 29-07-2011] 12-11-2014 ,oa 28-11-2014 eas of.kZr izkfo/kkuksa ds vk/kkj ij fu.kZ; ysrs gq, fu;qfDr fo"k;d dk;Zokgh fu;ekuqlkj dj ifj"kn dk;kZy; dks fnukad 22-02-2018 rd voxr djkuk lqfuf'pr djsaA Hkonh; g0 viBuh;
lfpo] m0iz0 csfld f'k{kk ifj"kn bykgkcknA^^
5. In view of the above, the grievance is that when the circular letter has been issued only on 13.02.2018, there was no occasion to deny such benefit to the petitioners and accordingly the petitioners have already made a detailed representation on 16.11.2018 to the Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad with an advance copy sent to District Basic Education Officer, Lahimpur Khiri. However, decision has not been taken and therefore, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking appropriate direction so that matter can be urgently decided either way.
6. Sri A.K. Yadav, learned Advocate appearing for the Board does not have any objection in case if, the direction is issued to the competent authority i.e. Board for taking decision in the matter on merits in accordance with law. The direction, therefore, is issued to Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Board, Allahabad to take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law and in the light of his own circular letter dated 13.02.2018 in the matter as expeditiously as possible within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
7. With the aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 IrfanUddin