Interpretation of eligibility criteria for the selection of Principals in Government Inter Colleges based on teaching experience, emphasizing that teaching experience need not be limited to government schools and institutions.

ORDER :

M.B. Shah, J.

Civil Appeal No. 1124 of 2000 is delinked.

2. This batch of appeals/special leave petitions are filed against the judgment and order dated 13-5-1998 passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in various writ petitions pertaining to the interviews held by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (for short "U.P. PSC") for the 216 posts of Principals in Government (Boys/Girls) Inter College of the State. U.P. PSC held examinations and interviews in the year 1997. The High Court while relying upon the relevant Act and the Rules and the eligibility criteria prescribed for such appointment has, however, read into the selfsame additional facts and noted that it was the first experience to hold the interviews of such requirements resulting into expansion of scope of the same.

3. In order, however, to assess the situation in its proper perspective, the eligibility criteria for selection to the post of Principal, Government Intermediate College (Boys/Girls) ought to be considered and the same reads as under:

Eligibility Criteria (Essentials):

(a) A postgraduate degree from a university established by law in India or a degree recognised by the Government as equivalent thereto.

(b) LT Diploma of the Department of Education, Uttar Pradesh, or BT or BEd or an equivalent degree of a university.

(c) At least three years' experience as Head of a Higher Secondary or normal school or in teaching Intermediate or higher classes or as a lecturer in CT or LT training college.

4. In these appeals/petitions U.P. PSC was concerned with the interpretation of Clause 3 which provides for:

(i) Three years' teaching experience as Head of a High School or normal school.

(ii) Three years' experience of teaching Intermediate or higher classes.

(iii) Three years' teaching experience as Lecturer in CT/LT training college.

5. The records depict that U.P. PSC has declared the results of interviews on the assumption that teaching experience must be from Government schools/institutions or government-aided schools/institutions.

6. It is to be stated that the aforesaid Rules nowhere prescribe that teaching experience should be that of a teacher in Government college or government-aided or unaided college or institution. Teaching experience may be from any Higher Secondary School or High School or from an institute having Intermediate or higher classes. Further, a Lecturer having three years' teaching experience in CT/LT training college is also eligible.

7. After considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant-petitioners and the stand taken by U.P. PSC the High Court issued various directions in its operative part of the judgment. The first direction is as under:

"(i) The candidates who were claiming to work as the Lecturers/Heads of High Schools or normal schools or Lecturers in CT/LT training college recognised by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, the recognition of which institutions has been approved by the State Government and who have gained three years' teaching experience for teaching Intermediate and higher classes on the basis of their appointment/promotion in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act and the Regulations framed thereunder as well as 5th and 6th Removal of Difficulties Orders, shall be eligible for being selected even if they are not getting their salaries."

8. The aforesaid direction is to be considered in the light of the discussion in the judgment which specifically provides that if the teachers who have been substantively appointed in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Regulations framed thereunder are not paid the salary from the public treasury as those institutions were not given maintenance grant/grant-in-aid, it cannot be blamed for the lapse on the part of the State Government and such teacher cannot be excluded for being considered to be appointed. The learned counsel for the parties have pointed that most of the matters filed by the