IMPORTANT POINT
Reserved category candidates clearing the TET with relaxed standards should be considered against unreserved posts, and relaxation in TET pass marks does not provide an advantage in the recruitment process.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Ms. S. Dev, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U. Sarma, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education Department, appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present proceeding, has raised a grievance with regard to the non-consideration of her case for appointment as Post Graduate Teacher in the subject of Political Science(Bengali Medium) against any of the vacancies that were so advertised vide the 2(two) Advertisements, both, dated 28.12.2022, bearing No. GB-EST/Advertisement (GT&PGT)/1/2022/7 and GB-EST/Advertisement (GT& PGT)/1/2022/8.

3. The petitioner has contended that in pursuance of the Advertisements, in question, she had submitted her candidature for being considered against the post of Post Graduate Teacher in the subject of Political Science(Bengali Medium).

4. The petitioner had applied for the said post as available in 3 Districts viz. Cachar, Karimganj, and Hailakandi, as per the provisions made in this connection in the said Advertisements. The petitioner was, thereafter, required to appear in the selection process so involved. The petitioner, herein, appeared in the said selection process. However, on publication of the merit list in the matter; it was found that the name of the petitioner did not find a place therein. On an enquiry, the petitioner was given to understand that her case for appointment against the available vacancies were not so considered on account of the fact that in her TET Examination for the Higher Secondary Level, she had not achieved 60% marks in all the papers involved. The petitioner had undertaken the TET Examination for the Higher Secondary Level in the year 2021 and had scored 64 and 54 marks respectively, in Paper-I and Paper-II of the said TET Examination. Although the petitioner had an aggregate 60 marks in the said TET Examination, however, she did not have the requisite 60% marks in Paper-II. The petitioner belongs to the SC community and accordingly, she having scored 55% marks in the said TET Examination, she was held to have qualified the TET Examination.

5. It is contention of the petitioner herein that the reserved community seats as advertised having been filled-up; the case of the petitioner was not further considered against the unreserved vacancies available against the post of Post Graduate Teacher in the subject of Political Science(Bengali Medium) in various provincialized Colleges of the said 3 Districts only on the ground that she did score 60% marks in her TET Examination and had qualified the said Examination, basing on relaxed standards.

6. In view of the said position; an issue arises in the present proceeding as to whether the petitioner having cleared the TET Examination with relaxed standards, can now be denied consideration for appointment against a post which was advertised as an unreserved post although she had scored marks higher than the other candidates participating and now available in the fray for the said post.

7. The said issue need not detain this Court any further in-as-much as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vikas Sankhala & ors. v. Vikas Kumar Agarwal & ors., reported in (2017) 1 SCC 350, had concluded that on the basis of the TET marks, a reserved category candidate had not got any advantage while having his case considered against an unreserved post and accordingly, permitted reserved category candidates clearing the TET with relaxed standards to appear in the selection process and to have their cases also considered against the unreserved posts involved.

8. The relevant part of the judgment, referred to above, is extracted hereinbelow for a better understanding of the position:

“ISSUES TO BE DECIDED

27. The history of events, right upto the decision of the High Court, gives a clear glimpse of the questions of law that need to be determined by this Court. At this juncture, we would like to formulate these issues, as under:

i) Wheth