Without TET, If Candidates selected for Teacher after notification of NCTE regarding Teacher Eligibility Test then they are NOT eligible for appointment
It is bad luck of Candidates, who are appointed later to Notification of NCTE regarding TET eligibility.
See Case Details -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4996 of 2012
Petitioner :- Smt. Amrita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- V.K. Singh,G.K. Singh,Rajesh Kr. Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,K.S. Kushwaha
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.
1. By means of present writ petition, petitioner is challenging order dated 14.12.2011 passed by District Basic Education Officer, Varanasi whereby he has disapproved appointment of petitioner on the ground that her selection was made contrary to Government Order dated 7.9.2011 i.e. without passing Teachers Eligibility Test.
2. In my view no such relief can be granted after enactment of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 2009"). The Act 2009, vide Section 23 (1), provides that any person possessing such minimum qualification, as laid down by an academic authority authorised by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher. It reads as under:
"23. Qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.- (1) Any person possessing such minimum qualifications, as laid down by an academic authority authorized by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher."
3. Since the provision does not contemplate appointment of a Teacher who is not qualified as per Regulations of N.C.T.C., any provision made earlier even if permit unqualified persons to be appointed in certain cases, cannot be followed after framing of Regulations by Authorised Authority. Prior to Act, 2009, the provisions permitting appointment of untrained persons could have been complied in the absence of otherwise overriding provisions since the same had no occasion to infringe any other statute having overriding effect but after Act, 2009 and Regulations framed thereunder, the situation has undergone a wide change. It is not disputed that National Council of Teachers Education has been notified as Authorised Academic Authority under Section 23 (1) and the said body has framed Regulations laying down minimum qualification and eligibility conditions for appointment of Teachers in Primary Schools. In the light of said provisions, which have been made under Act, 2009; the same have overriding effect and, therefore, the otherwise provisions under provincial legislation would sub-serve.
4. This Court in its judgment dated 12.12.2011 in Writ Petition No. 70682 of 2011 (Sarita Shukla & Others Vs. State Of U.P. and Others), having relied on provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and Rules framed thereunder as well as the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 2009) and Regulations framed by NCTE under Section 23 of Act, 2009, has clearly observed that after enforcement of Act, 2009 no appointment can be made on the post of Assistant Teacher in a Primary institution if the person does not possess the qualification prescribed by NCTE in the Regulations notified under Section 23 of Act, 2009.
5. I am, therefore, clearly of the view that the relief, as sought in the writ petition, cannot be granted in the above circumstances.
6. Dismissed.
Dt. 2.2.2012
PS
Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=1668214
It is bad luck of Candidates, who are appointed later to Notification of NCTE regarding TET eligibility.
See Case Details -
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4996 of 2012
Petitioner :- Smt. Amrita
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- V.K. Singh,G.K. Singh,Rajesh Kr. Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,K.S. Kushwaha
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.
1. By means of present writ petition, petitioner is challenging order dated 14.12.2011 passed by District Basic Education Officer, Varanasi whereby he has disapproved appointment of petitioner on the ground that her selection was made contrary to Government Order dated 7.9.2011 i.e. without passing Teachers Eligibility Test.
2. In my view no such relief can be granted after enactment of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 2009"). The Act 2009, vide Section 23 (1), provides that any person possessing such minimum qualification, as laid down by an academic authority authorised by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher. It reads as under:
"23. Qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.- (1) Any person possessing such minimum qualifications, as laid down by an academic authority authorized by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher."
3. Since the provision does not contemplate appointment of a Teacher who is not qualified as per Regulations of N.C.T.C., any provision made earlier even if permit unqualified persons to be appointed in certain cases, cannot be followed after framing of Regulations by Authorised Authority. Prior to Act, 2009, the provisions permitting appointment of untrained persons could have been complied in the absence of otherwise overriding provisions since the same had no occasion to infringe any other statute having overriding effect but after Act, 2009 and Regulations framed thereunder, the situation has undergone a wide change. It is not disputed that National Council of Teachers Education has been notified as Authorised Academic Authority under Section 23 (1) and the said body has framed Regulations laying down minimum qualification and eligibility conditions for appointment of Teachers in Primary Schools. In the light of said provisions, which have been made under Act, 2009; the same have overriding effect and, therefore, the otherwise provisions under provincial legislation would sub-serve.
4. This Court in its judgment dated 12.12.2011 in Writ Petition No. 70682 of 2011 (Sarita Shukla & Others Vs. State Of U.P. and Others), having relied on provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and Rules framed thereunder as well as the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 2009) and Regulations framed by NCTE under Section 23 of Act, 2009, has clearly observed that after enforcement of Act, 2009 no appointment can be made on the post of Assistant Teacher in a Primary institution if the person does not possess the qualification prescribed by NCTE in the Regulations notified under Section 23 of Act, 2009.
5. I am, therefore, clearly of the view that the relief, as sought in the writ petition, cannot be granted in the above circumstances.
6. Dismissed.
Dt. 2.2.2012
PS
Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=1668214
0 comments:
Post a Comment