Advocates:
CHITRA MARKANDAYA

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 8

CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 4507-4508 of 2005

PETITIONER:

MOHD. SARTAJ AND ANR

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16/01/2006

BENCH:

S.B. Sinha & P.P. Naolekar

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT

P.P. NAOLEKAR,J.

In the year 1984, the Government of U.P. had decided to

appoint Urdu teachers in most of the districts of U.P. and the number

of teachers to be appointed for each district was fixed. For the district

of Muzaffarnagar, 60 Urdu teachers were to be appointed. In

pursuance of the decision of the Government of U.P., the Basic

Shiksha Adhikari, Distt. Muzaffarnagar by an advertisement dated

15.10.84 invited applications for the post of Asstt. Teachers (Urdu).

The minimum educational qualification for the said post as per the

advertisement was that the candidates should have either passed the

Higher Secondary, Intermediate or equivalent examination thereto

recognized by the Government (along with Urdu as subject) and

possessed the Basic Teacher’s Certificate (B.T.C.), Hindustani

Teacher’s Certificate, Junior Teacher’s Certificate (J.T.C.), or

Certificate of Teaching (T.C.) or equivalent thereto, recognized by the

Government or any training equivalent thereto. The advertisement

also provided that the higher caste candidates who were trained by

1974 and those Scheduled Caste, Backward Caste and Scheduled

Tribe candidates, who were trained upto 1975 may only apply

because other candidates trained after this period were not going to

be considered. Both the appellants had the High School Degree as

well as the Intermediate Degree with Urdu as one of the subjects

along with Urdu Training Certificate such as Adib, Adib-e-Mahir and

Moallim-e-Urdu from the Jamia Urdu, Aligarh. In pursuance of the

advertisement issued dated 15.10.84, the Basic Education Board,

Muzaffarnagar conducted an interview and the Upper Basic Shiksha

Adhikari, respondent no.4 herein, on 19.6.85 published a list of

selected candidates, which included the names of the appellants

herein. The list / memorandum itself provided that all the selected

candidates were required to join their respective schools / colleges

within the period of 15 days, otherwise their appointment would

automatically be deemed to be cancelled. After receipt of the

memorandum both the appellants joined duties within the stipulated

15 days and started working as per the conditions of service.

However, on 7.8.85, i.e., within a very short span of their appointment

the Urdu Advisory Director of Education, respondent no.2 herein,

issued direction to respondent no.4, regarding the cancellation of

the appointment of the appellants on the ground that they did not

possess the Basic Training Certificate (B.T.C.). Respondent no. 4

vide his letter dated 9.8.85 cancelled their appointment and directed

them to contact the appointing authority, along with B.T.C. and

Intermediate (Urdu Certificate) for the purpose of verification , if these

documents were in their possession. Being aggrieved by the above-

mentioned order, the appellants filed a writ petition before the

Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on 20.9.85 and the High

Court stayed the operation of the order of cancellation of their

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 8

appointments.

Meanwhile, the appellants acquired B.T.C. in 1993 and 1995

respectively and continued with their service. Before their

appointment, on 28.1.85 the Special Secretary to the U.P.

Government by letter informed all heads of departments and Chief

Officers, U.P. that Hon’ble Governor had approved such candidates

who were qualified as Moallim-e-Urdu from Jamia Urdu, Aligarh and

got the experience of teaching at Higher Secondary School as eligible

for employment in the State services / educational institutions.

Similarly, on 21.10.88 the Special Secretary to the U.P. Government

passed an order to inform all head of de