SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Raj) 392

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, JJ.
Sher Singh S/o Shri Murari Lal - Appellants
Versus
Dinesh Singh S/o Karan Singh - Respondents
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1464, 1489, 1509-1511, 1543, 1609, 10745, 10872-10874, 11595, 11701 of 2016, 12, 49 of 2017
Decided on : 27-04-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. S.N. Kumawat, Mr. Vigyan Shah with Mr. Kamlesh Sharma, Mr. Tanveer Ahmed, Mr. Laxmikant (Malpura), Mr. Hari Krishan Sharma, Mr. Raghu Nandan Sharma, Mr. Anoop Dhand, Mr. R.D. Meena, Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma
For the Respondents:Mr. N.M. Lodha, Advocate General Assisted By Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma, Mr. S.K. Gupta, AAG, Mr. Ashok Gaur, Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Ajay Chaoudhary, Mr. Ashish Sharma Upadhyay for NCTE.

Important Point - It is inappropriate for the Courts to issue a mandate to the State or its authorities to act in a particular fashion and manner.

Headnote:Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Section 23(1) – Present Appeal challenges the order of the Single Judge referring the writ petitions to the Division Bench regarding the advertisement and conditions thereto issued by the Director, Elementary Education – Constitution has specifically demarcated the ambit of power and boundaries of the three organs of the society by laying down principles of separation of powers which have to be adhered for carrying out democratic functioning of the country - Subordinate legislations are framed by the executive by exercising the delegated powers conferred by the statute which is the rule making power - It is inappropriate for the Courts to issue a mandate to the State or its authorities to act in a particular fashion and manner - Directions issued by the learned Single Judge would amount to legislate as to how the appointments should be made and what should be the qualification for the post of Teacher in the subjects and what should be the minimum qualification for appointment of a Teacher in a particular subject - The decision to incorporate the marks obtained at various levels to treat a particular individual as eligible for appointment as a Teacher in a particular subject would solely rest with the Government who may frame rules thereto - This Court cannot embark upon such an exercise - The advertisement condition of preparation of merit itself being vague and contrary to the purpose sought to be achieved deserves to be set aside –Same is set aside - The selection on the basis of the condition laid down in the advertisement is held to be bad in law and the said criteria is declared as invalid with further directions to the authority to re-advertise the vacancies by preparing a valid criteria of merit for appointment of Teachers for level-2.

       

       Result - Appeals/petitions stand disposed of with certain observations/directions.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.

1. The DB Special Appeals (Writ) at Item No.1, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 16 arise out of the order dt.07/11/2016 passed by the learned Single Judge while the DB Special Appeals (Writ) at Item No.2, 7 and 15 arise out of the order passed by the learned Single Judge dt.02/11/2016. Apart from above, the DB Civil Writ Petitions at Item No.8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 have been referred by the learned Single Judge to the Division Bench in view of the pendency of the aforesaid DB Special Appeals (Writ) relating to the same question of law as well as with regard to the advertisement and conditions thereto issued by the Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner dt.06/07/2016 and therefore, all the aforesaid cases have been heard together by this Court individually and are being decided by this common judgment since the issue raised in the said cases is germane.

2. Without adverting to facts relating to each appellant/petitioner, the admitted facts, which are relevant, are being noted for the purpose of disposal of all these cases in relation to the two judgments passed by the learned Single Judge.

3. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short, ‘Act of 2009’) was brought into force after incorporation Article 21-A in the Constitution of India. In terms of sub-section 1 of Section 23 of the Act of 2009 and in pursuance of the notification dt.31/03/2010 issued by the Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of India, the National Council for Teachers Education (for short, ‘NCTE’) laid down minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as Teacher for teaching Class I to VIII in a school referred to in Clause N of Section 2 of the Act of 2009 w.e.f. 23/08/2010.

4. The NCTE vide notification dt.29/07/2011 amended the said minimum qualification and for the purpose of the present cases, the amended qualifications laid down for Teachers for Class VI to VIII are as under:-

“2. Classes VI-VIII

a. Graduation and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name/town)

OR

Graduation with at least 50% marks and I-year Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.)

OR

Graduation with at least 45% marks and I year Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.) in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations issued from time to time in this regard.

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year Bachelor in Elementary Education (B.E.Ed).

OR

Senior Secondary (or its Equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year B.A/B.Sc.Ed or B.A.Ed/B.Sc.Ed.

OR

Graduation with at least 50% marks and I-year B.Ed. (Special Education).

AND

(b) Pass in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.”

5. The NCTE also issued guidelines for conducting Teachers Eligibility Test (for short, ‘TET’) vide letter dt. 11/02/2011 circulating it to all the Secretaries, Commissioners of Education of the State Governments/Uts which provided the background and rationale for including the TET as a minimum qualification for a person to be eligible for appointment as a Teacher as under:-

“1. It would bring national standards and benchmark of teacher quality in the recruitment process;

2. It would induce teacher education institutions and students from these institutions to further improve their performance standards;

3. It would send a positive signal to all stakeholders that the Government lays special emphasis on teacher quality.”

6. The foremost eligibility for appearing in TET was that the person, who has acquired the academic and professional qualifications and who is pursuing any of the Teachers’ Education Courses as recognized by the NCTE, should be allowed to participate in the examination.

7. In terms of the guidelines issued by the NCTE, the Rajasthan Government, being the appropriate Government in terms of the notification dt.29/07/2011, issued an advertisement for conducting the




















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top