No rule or advertisement clause bars Para Teachers from enhancing qualifications while serving; with permission, diligent service and higher merit than selected, candidature must be considered.

JUDGMENT :

Deepak Roshan, J.

I.A. No.6132 of 2025

1. The instant interlocutory application being I.A. No.6132/2025 has been preferred by the appellants for condonation of delay of 252 days.

2. Looking to the averments made in the instant application, we are of the view that sufficient cause has been shown. Accordingly, we condone the delay and dispose of the I.A. No.6132 of 2025.

L.P.A. No.352 of 2025

3. With consent of the parties the main appeal is taken up for hearing.

4. This intra court appeal is directed against the judgment dated 12.07.2024 passed by the Ld. Writ Court in W.P.(S) No.1860 of 2021, whereby the 3rd respondent was directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Class-I-V) under para category, subject-Khortha, pursuant to the advertisement No.7/2015 within a period of 8 weeks from the date of Writ’s Court order.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously argued that the learned Single Judge has not considered the vital aspect of the matter that since the petitioner has obtained higher degree as a regular student while working as Para Teacher, accordingly, the same is misconduct and her candidature was rightly not considered in spite of the fact that she had obtained higher marks than the last selected candidates. Accordingly, he submits that the order of the Writ Court is fit to be quashed and set aside.

6. However, upon query by this Court, he was unable to demonstrate whether any notification or resolution exists to the effect that regular candidates are barred from pursuing higher qualifications while serving as Para Teachers.

7. Per contra, it has been contended by the respondent-writ petitioner that there is no term and condition mentioned in the advertisement, which stipulates that a candidate cannot enhance her educational qualification while working as a Para Teacher; nor is there any such rule or bar suggesting that if a candidate has enhanced his/her educational qualification as a Para Teacher, her candidature will be rejected.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, and after going through the documents available on record, it transpires that the petitioner had preferred a writ petition with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to consider her case for appointment to the post of Inter Trained Teacher (Assistant Teacher, Class I–V) under the Para Teacher category for the District of Chatra, subject– Khortha, pursuant to advertisement no. 07/2015 (amended), since she has obtained higher marks than the last selected candidate.

9. It is the case of the petitioner that she has obtained a total of 53.59 marks, whereas the cut-off marks were only 52.41 in the MBC, female category. According to the petitioner, she had completed her Intermediate course after taking due permission from the superior authorities, i.e., the Block Education Extension Officer, which is evident from the letter dated 20.03.2005, as contained in Annexure-R/1 of the rejoinder to the writ petition. The petitioner had never absented herself from her work as a Para Teacher, and she had worked diligently without any complaint from any corner, which is evident from the certificate dated 18.06.2018 (Annexure-3) of the writ petition.

10. Further case of the petitioner is that, in spite of having secured more marks than the last selected candidate, she was not called for counselling, as she was informed that she had completed her Intermediate Degree not through distance learning, and hence her candidature could not be