Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajesh Sharma vs State Of Haryana & Others on 22 March, 2013
Author: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
Bench: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013
DATE OF DECISION: March 22, 2013
Rajesh Sharma .......Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & others .......Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA
Present: Mr.Raje Ram Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.
<><><>
TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.
The petitioner has filed the instant petition praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus seeking directions to the respondent - Haryana School Teachers Selection Board to consider him for selection and appointment to the post of PRT Teacher, in the light of public notice dated 8.3.2013, Annexure P3.
2. Brief facts would require notice. The Haryana School Teachers Selection Board issued advertisement dated 8.11.2012 inviting applications for recruitment to 8763 posts of Primary Teachers (PRT) - (Group-C post). The essential qualifications prescribed for the post were in the following terms: CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013 2
"Essential Qualification/Eligibility:-
(i) Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education; OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 45% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure), Regulations, 2002; OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4 - year Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.); OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Education (Special Education); OR B.A./B.Sc./B.Com and 2 -year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known).
(for recognition of Diploma/Degree see note-2).
(ii) Certificate of having qualified Haryana Teacher Eligibility Test (HTET)/School Teacher Eligibility Test (STET) of Haryana for Primary Teacher.
OR Four years teaching experience as Primary Teachers as One time exemption of HTET/STET (See Note-3).
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013 3
(iii) Matric with Hindi/Sanskrit or 10+2/B.A./M.A. with Hindi as one of the subject."
3. The closing date for submission of application forms was stipulated as 8.12.2012. In the advertisement itself, as per note-3, a one-time exemption from qualifying HTET/STET examination had been granted to such candidates who possess four years teaching experience as Primary Teachers. Note-3 contained in the advertisement was in the following terms:
"Note-3. A one time exemption of HTET/STET for teachers who till 11.04.2012 have worked for minimum
4 years in privately managed Govt. Aided Schools, Recognized Schools and Govt. Schools. Number of years is cumulative, candidate must be in service as PRT on 11.04.2012 and in position on the date of applying. The teaching experience must be as Primary Teacher after acquiring essential qualification and supported by salary slip. They will have to qualify HTET not later than 1st April, 2015 otherwise their services will be terminated automatically."
4. There is no dispute as regards the fact that the petitioner, even though, is a HTET qualified candidate but he did not possess the requisite/essential qualification of ETT as on the closing date for submission of application forms stipulated in the advertisement i.e. 8.11.2012. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner himself that his result pertaining to ETT qualification was declared only on 8.1.2013.
5. Civil Writ Petition No.15929 of 2012 titled as "Shivani CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013 4 Gupta and others v. State of Haryana and others" was filed in this Court impugning the offending part in Note-3 contained in the advertisement dated 8.11.2012 as regards one-time exemption of HTET/STET which was to the following effect:
"Candidate must be in service as PRT on 11.4.2012 and in position on the date of applying."
6. The aforementioned writ petition was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court on 21.12.2012 and it was held that the requirement for claiming exemption of HTET/STET would be only possessing the requisite four years experience as PRT upto the relevant date i.e. 11.4.2012 and as such, the stipulation contained in Note-3 to the effect that the candidate must be in service as PRT on 11.4.2012 and in possession of four years experience on the date of applying was held to be bad in law.
7. The decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court on 21.12.2012 while allowing Civil Writ Petition No.15929 of 2012 necessitated the issuance of a public notice dated 8.3.2013 at Annexure P3 by the respondent-Board whereby applications were invited only from such candidates who had four years teaching experience as PRT till 11.4.2012 and were also eligible as on 8.12.2012, and the closing date for submission of application forms was stipulated as 17.3.2013.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has raised a claim as regards entertaining the application of the petitioner for the post of PRT on the ground that since applications have again been invited upto 17.3.2013 and the petitioner having qualified the ETT examination on 8.1.2013, there would be no CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013 5 impediment in law as regards consideration of the candidature of the petitioner for the post is concerned. Learned counsel would further argue that no prejudice would be caused in case directions are issued even at this stage as the selection process is still under way and the same has not been finalized.
9. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and having perused the pleadings on record, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition merits dismissal.
10. The initial advertisement was issued on 8.11.2012 for recruitment to the post of PRT. The essential qualifications had been prescribed. The closing date for submission of application forms had also been stipulated i.e. 8.12.2012. The petitioner, admittedly, did not possess the essential/requisite qualification of ETT as on 8.12.2012 as the result of the same as per his own case was declared only on 8.1.2013. The subsequent public notice dated 8.3.2013, Annexure P3, had been issued only for the benefit of such candidates who were claiming exemption from HTET/STET on the basis of possessing four years teaching experience as PRT but had been held ineligible in the light of the offending clause in note-3 that was subsequently quashed by this Court in Shivani Gupta's case (supra) decided on 21.12.2012. The petitioner is not claiming exemption from HTET. Rather, he is a qualified HTET candidate. The eligibility of the petitioner, as such, for the post of PRT would have to be determined in the light of the closing date stipulated in the original advertisement i.e. as on 8.12.2012. The prayer raised in the instant writ petition for CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5588 OF 2013 6 consideration of the candidature of the petitioner for the post of PRT in pursuance to the public notice dated 8.3.2013, Annexure P3, as such, is without any merit.
11. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
( TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA )
March 22, 2013 JUDGE
SRM
Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter? (Yes/No)