ORDER :

K.S. Radhakrishana, J. - Leave granted.

2. The Director, School Education, Uttrakhand, issued an advertisement dated 7th August, 2008, inviting applications from eligible persons for appointment as Assistant Teachers (General) by way of direct recruitment. Para 5 of the advertisement referred to the educational qualifications, operative portion of which reads as follows:-

"1. Bachelor degree in any of two subjects Geography, Economics, Political Science and History from any university established by law in India.

2. L.T. Diploma from any training institution/degree college.

3. In response to the aforesaid advertisement, Respondents applied mentioning the qualifications as B.Ed. with Specialisation in Vocational Education. Since the Respondents did not hold the decree as per the prescribed rules and notification, applications submitted by the Respondents were not considered. Aggrieved by the same, the Respondents filed Writ Petition No. 1035 of 2007 before the High Court of Uttrakhand at Nainital. Learned Single Judge of the High Court vide order dated 1.9.2008 allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the rejection of the candidature of the Respondents for the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade). Direction was also given to the Appellant to process the applications submitted by the Respondents. Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellants took up the matter in appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal, against which this appeal has been preferred.

3-A. Ms. Rachana Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants, submitted that there is a marked difference between the B.Ed. degree and the B.Ed. with Specialisation in Vocational Education. The advertisement made mention of only B.Ed. degree and not B.Ed. with Specialisation in Vocational Education. Learned Counsel submitted that the High Court has committed a grave error in equating the B.Ed. degree with Specialisation in Vocational Education with B.Ed. degree simpliciter. Learned Counsel submitted that the appointment of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) is made to impart education to students in schools for which a specialisation in vocational education is not warranted.

4. Mr. Anil Nag, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, on the other hand submitted that there is no marked difference between B.Ed. simpliciter and the B.Ed. degree with Specialisation in Vocational Education. B.Ed. degree obtained by the Respondents, it was submitted, is a composite degree which takes in its curriculum not only general subjects meant for B.Ed. simpliciter, but in addition subjects which are necessary for vocational training as well. Further, it was pointed out that M.J.P. Rohilkhand University grants B.Ed. degree in both general as well as B.Ed. degree with Specialisation in Vocational Education. Reference was also made to letter dated 13.7.2007 issued by the University. Learned Counsel submitted that the High Court has rightly held that the degree of Bachelor of Education, if passed with vocational education from a recognised University, shall not be, ignored for the purpose of admission in view of the advertisement issued by the State Government.

5. The Government of Uttrakhand, in exercise of powers conferred under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, framed the Uttrakhand Subordinate Education (Training Graduate Grade) Service Rules for the purpose of regulating recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed under the said Rules. Rules were notified in the Official Gazette on 28th July, 2006. The Rules prescribed the qualification for Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade as Bachelor Degree in concerned subject with the degree in Bachelor of Education (B. Ed.). The subjects approved under B.Ed. are as under:

(1) Teaching in emerging Indian Society.

(2) Development of learner and teaching learning process.

(3) Essential of Educational Technology and Management.

(4) Development of Education System in India.