Discrimination in the admission to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course on the basis of caste is violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:
CORRESPONDENCE D.ED. COURSE - ADMISSION - OPEN AND OBC CATEGORY CANDIDATES - DISCRIMINATION - ARTICLES 14, 15 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION - EQUITABLE RELIEF - PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL - ADMISSION TO CORRESPONDENCE D.ED. COURSE TO UNTRAINED PRIMARY ASSISTANT TEACHERS BELONGING TO OPEN AND OBC CATEGORIES - DIRECTED.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who are appointed as Assistant Teachers in different primary schools, were denied admission to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course, which was available only to candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste (S.C.), Schedule Tribe (S.T.) and Vimukta Jati and Nomadic Tribe (V.J.N.T.) categories. The petitioners contended that this discrimination was violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the discrimination made in the admission to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course was violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The Court found that the discrimination was arbitrary, unreasonable and had no nexus with the object sought to be achieved. The Court also held that the petitioners were entitled to equitable relief and promissory estoppel, as they had opted for the service on the representation that they would be able to obtain the D.Ed. qualification within 5 years.
Issues: 1. Whether the discrimination made in the admission to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course was violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the petitioners were entitled to equitable relief and promissory estoppel?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the discrimination made in the admission to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course was violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The Court found that the discrimination was arbitrary, unreasonable and had no nexus with the object sought to be achieved. 2. The Court held that the petitioners were entitled to equitable relief and promissory estoppel, as they had opted for the service on the representation that they would be able to obtain the D.Ed. qualification within 5 years.
Final Decision: The Court directed the authorities to admit the Untrained Primary Assistant Teachers, belonging to Open and O.B.C. categories, to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course hereafter, by supplying and accepting their forms, if they are otherwise eligible, for the batches which would commence hereafter. The Court also directed that the services of such teachers, who are given appointment on the condition that they will obtain D.Ed. qualification within five years, shall not be brought to an end, merely because they have not obtained the D.Ed. qualification.

JUDGMENT - B.N. DESHMUKH, J. :---Rule in all the petitions, returnable forthwith. The learned A.G.P. waives service on behalf of the concerned respondents.

2. These petitions raise important point of law and affect large number of Assistant Teachers teaching in different primary schools. The petitioners in all these petitions are appointed as Assistant Teachers in different primary schools. One of the conditions mentioned at the time of appointment is that they have to obtain D.Ed. qualification within 5 years of their appointments. In all these petitions, at the time of appointments, these Assistant Teachers had not obtained D.Ed. qualification. They were required to obtain D.Ed. qualification within five years; otherwise, their services were made liable to be terminated. In almost all the petitions, the petitioners, who were appointed as Assistant Teachers, were granted approval by the Education Department, and in the remaining cases, by the competent authorities constituted in Municipal Councils, etc. After allowing the candidates to be appointed as Assistant Teachers without D.Ed. qualification, in the primary schools, the Government had introduced a scheme, known as Postal (Correspondence) D.Ed. Course. There is also a regular D.Ed. Course, to which the candidates can seek admission. The regular D.Ed. Course is available to the candidates, who are not in service along with the candidates who are in service. But the Correspondence D.Ed. Course is provided for only in respect of the teachers, who are already in service appointed by the recognised primary schools; and whose services are approved by the authorities of the Education Department. These petitions are filed by the Assistant Teachers, who are teaching in primary schools for over number of years; and, according to them, they are also eligible qua experiencewise to get admission to Correspondence D.Ed. Course this year also, as the institutions in which they are serving are recognised institutions for number of years; and not only that, but the services of these petitioners are also approved by the competent authorities, including of Education Department, wherever such approval is required for the appointment of the candidates as Assistant Teachers.

3. The petitioners belong to Open and/or Other Backward Class (O.B.C.) category. None of them belongs to Scheduled Caste (S.C.), Schedule Tribe (S.T.) or Vimukta Jati and Nomadic Tribe (V.J.N.T.) category.

4. The Counsel for the petitioners, Sarvashri Sunil A. Kulkarni, S.V. Ceandole, Mr. Salunke, R.R. Suryawanshi, S.D. Dhongade, Kiran Dantal, N.K. Kakade, C.K. Shinde, S.L. Beedkar, S.B. Kulkarni, V.M. Kondre, V.G. Sakolkar, N.B. Patil, A.S. Golegaonkar, D.R. Shelke, P.G. Gunale, Vijay Sharma and Smt. Smita Deshpande, have contended that the authorities are denying admission to the petitioners to the Correspondence D.Ed. Course and even not accepting the forms for getting admission to the said course. The petitioners were informed by the authorities that this year the Correspondence D.Ed. Course is not available to candidates belonging to open and/or O.B.C. category candidates, "except for those who are teaching in schools located in specified hilly areas". The course is available only in favour of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, and Vimukta Jati and Nomadic Tribe category candidates. This departure is made this year only. Till last year, all candidates from all areas belonging to various categories including Open and O.B.C. categories, would get admission to the Correspondence D.Ed. course.

5. It was argued that the departure by admitting the candidates of S.C., S.T. and V.J.N.T. categories only results in discrimination, which is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The discrimination is alleged to be arbitrary and said to have no nexus with the object sought to be achieved. The discrimination is further said to be unreasonable, having regard to the object, namely, of enabling the in-service assistant te

Click Here to Read the rest of this document