IMPORTANT POINT
State Government cannot be faulted for altering selection criteria by relaxing 5% marks in favour of reserved category candidates.

Headnote:(A) National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 – Section 23 – Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Section 23 (1) – Appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers and B.T. Assistants – Relaxation in requisite qualification – Granting relaxation to SC/ST, OBC, physically handicapped and de-notified communities is in furtherance of constitutional obligation of State to under-privileged and create an equal level-playing field – Madras High Court rightly held that Government of Tamil Nadu has acted in exercise of powers conferred under clause 9 of Guidelines issued by NCTE – Madurai Bench was not right in quashing G.O.(Ms.) No.25 dated 06.02.2014 on ground that such relaxation based upon theory of social justice is actually destructive of very fabric of social justice – Judgment of Madurai Bench has not kept in view constitutional obligation of State to provide equal level-playing field to under privileged – In consonance with M. Nagaraj case, affirmative action taken by State Government granting relaxation for TET would not amount to dilution of standards – View taken by Madurai Bench is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside. (Para 27)
       (B) Service Law – Reservation – State Government cannot be faulted for altering selection criteria by relaxing 5% marks in favour of reserved category candidates – It is a matter of State policy to frame and prescribe selection norms with regard to services and posts connected with affairs of State – Courts cannot interfere with policy decisions of State especially when policy decision is taken in public interest to further advancement of reserved categories – A policy decision taken by State in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 162 of Constitution of India is subservient only to mandate of constitutional provisions and recruitment rules framed by State itself, either in terms of a legislative act or an executive order – Relaxation provided by State Government and criteria of selection laid down vide impugned government orders are in exercise of the powers provided under proviso to Article 309 of Constitution of India and being a policy decision in terms of its extant reservation policy cannot be impeached on ground that relaxation has been given to suit some specific class of individuals – There can be no question of estoppels against Government in exercise of its legislative, sovereign or executive powers. (Paras 29, 30 and 37)
       (C) Service Law – Appointment – Change brought about in selection criteria is Government’s prerogative – In terms of their extant reservation policy, State Government is free to take actions suitable to socio-economic conditions prevalent in State, especially with regard to selection of candidates belonging to reserved category to be employed in State Service – Merely because Government has widened ambit of selection so as to enable more and more candidates to take part in selection process, right of candidates who were already in process cannot be said to have been adversely affected – It is in interest of reserved category of candidates that more candidates take part in selection process and best and most efficient of them get selected – This will not amount to change in criteria for selection after selection process commenced. (Para 33)
       Facts of Case:
       Present batch of appeals raise identical questions of law and fact concerning appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers and B.T. Assistants in State of Tamil Nadu as per the Guidelines prescribed by National Council for Teacher Education in this regard. These appeals impugn conflicting judgments passed by both Madras and Madurai Bench of High Court of Madras in W.A. No. 1031/2014 & Others dated 22.09.2014; and W.P. No. 4558/2014 dated 25.09.2014 respectively. Dispute revolves around relaxation of 5% marks to reserved category candidates in State Teachers Eligibility Test approved by State Government, which is allegedly in contravention of norms to that effect embodied in notification dated 23.08.2010 issued by NCTE.
       Findings of Court:
       Contention that different Boards of Examination have different standards and examiners who evaluate scripts are in some places more liberal than others and that candidates who acquired qualifications decades back had to suffer strict evaluation as compared to the candidates who have qualified in the recent past facing liberal evaluation criteria, are all hypothetical arguments without any pleading and supporting material disclosed in the Writ Petitions. Weightage of marks for academic performance and TET fixed vide G.O.(Ms.) No.252 dated 05.10.2012 continues to be the same even after issuing G.O.(Ms.)No.71 dated 30.05.2014. Having taken up examination as per G.O.(Ms.) No.252, appellants cannot challenge award of weightage for distribution of marks for academic performance with reference to actual marks secured by each candidate. Appellants are not justified in challenging every rational decision taken by respondents to make selection process more fair and reasonable merely because outcome does not favour limited individual interests of appellants.
       Result – Appeals Partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

R. BANUMATHI J.

Leave granted.

2. The present batch of appeals raise identical questions of law and fact concerning appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers and B.T. Assistants in the State of Tamil Nadu as per the Guidelines prescribed by National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the NCTE) in this regard. These appeals impugn the conflicting judgments passed by both Madras and Madurai Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A. No. 1031/2014 & Others. dated 22.09.2014; and W.P. No. 4558/2014 dated 25.09.2014 respectively. The dispute revolves around the relaxation of 5% marks to the reserved category candidates in the State Teachers Eligibility Test (hereinafter referred to as the TET) approved by the State Government, which is allegedly in contravention of the norms to that effect embodied in the notification dated 23.08.2010 issued by the NCTE.

3. Pursuant to the mandate of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ("the RTE Act"), the NCTE laid down minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a Teacher through a Notification dated 11.02.2011. As per the said Notification: “…to be eligible for appointment as a teacher if any of the schools referred to in clause (n) of section 2 of the RTE Act is that he/she should pass the teacher eligibility test (TET) which will be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE”. NCTE Guidelines prescribed 60% marks to be declared as pass in TET. The said Guidelines enabled the State Government to grant concession to persons belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, other Backward Classes, differently-abled persons etc.

4. In pursuance of the provisions of the Act, the State Government enacted the Tamil Nadu Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2011. State Government issued Order No. G.O.Ms.No.181 dated 15.11.2011, prescribing 60% marks as pass marks for TET under the said G.O. The Teacher Recruitment Board was appointed as the Nodal Agency for conducting the TET and recruitment of teachers. Subsequently, the State Government vide G.O.(Ms.) No.252 School Education (Q) Department dated 05.10.2012 issued the Procedure/Guidelines for State Teachers’ Eligibility Test. The said Guidelines earmarked 60% marks for State eligibility test and the remaining 40% for academic performance of the candidates. The 40% performance-based marks were divided into 10 marks and 15 marks each for the Higher Secondary Examination/Degree Examination and D.T.Ed/B. Ed. examination respectively.

5. The Teachers Recruitment Board conducted the first TET-Paper I (Secondary Grade Teacher) and Paper II (Graduate Teacher) on 12.07.2012 throughout the State in which 7,14,526 candidates appeared and 2448(0.3%) were successful. The details of number of the candidates who appeared and who passed are as under:-

Exam	No. of candidates who appeared	No. of candidates who passed	% of pass
Paper I	3,05,405	1,735	0.57%
Paper II	4,09,121	713	0.17%
Total	7,14,526	2,448	0.34%

A supplementary TET was also conducted on 14.10.2012 for Paper I and Paper II in which all the candidates who had appeared in the first examination and had not secured 60% marks were allowed to appear without any additional examination fee. Around six lakh candidates appeared in the said exam, out of which 19,261 (around 3%) only cleared the TET. The details are as under:-

Exam	No. of candidates who appeared	No. of candidates who passed	% of pass
Paper I	2,78,725	10,397	3.7%
Paper II	3,64,370	8,864	2.4%
Total	6,43,095	19,261	2.9%

6. The third TET which is the subject matter of the present challenge was conducted by the Teacher Recruitment Board in two papers viz., Paper I and Paper II on 17.08.2013 and 18.08.2013 respectively. The T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 Supreme(SC) 878

IMPORTANT POINTState Government cannot be faulted for altering selection criteria by relaxing 5% marks in favour of reserved category candidates.

Cases Referred (8)

IMPORTANT POINT
State Government cannot be faulted for altering selection criteria by relaxing 5% marks in favour of reserved category candidates.