Uttarakhand High Court
State Of Uttarakhand And Others ... vs Lalit Kumar Singh on 22 April, 2019
Author: N.S. Dhanik
Bench: Ramesh Ranganathan, N.S. Dhanik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Special Appeal No. 178 of 2019
With
Delay Condonation Application No. 3014 of 2019
State of Uttarakhand and others ...Appellants
Vs.
Lalit Kumar Singh ...Respondent
Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhad-
appellants.
Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent.
Dated: 22nd, April, 2019
Coram: Hon'ble Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.
Hon'ble N.S. Dhanik, J.
Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. (Oral) The application to condone the delay of 265 days in preferring the appeal is not opposed and the delay is, therefore, condoned. Delay Condonation Application stands disposed of.
2. While both Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-appellants and Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1-writ petitioner, would agree that the subject matter of this appeal is similar to Special Appeal No. 127 of 2019, Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned Standing Counsel, would point out that, unlike the respondent-writ petitioner in Special Appeal No. 127 of 2019 and batch who had invoked the jurisdiction of this Court on the ground that they were not appointed despite possessing the prescribed qualifications, in the present case the respondent-writ petitioner was appointed and was later terminated from service as he did not possess the prescribed qualifications.
3. In Special Appeal No. 127 of 2019 and batch dated 18.03.2019 we had, while upholding the order passed by the learned Single Judge, observed :-
2"8. Section 23 of the 2009 Act relates to qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers and, under sub-section (1) thereof, any persons possessing such minimum qualifications, as laid down by an academic authority by the Central Government by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher.
9. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 23(1) of the 2009 Act, the NCTE prescribed the minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as teacher in Class I to VIII, vide notification dated 23.08.2010. Clause 1 thereof relates to the minimum qualification and, in so far as Classes I to V are concerned, the minimum qualification stipulated includes, among others, a senior secondary certificate (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and two years diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known) and a pass in Teacher Eligibility Test to be conducted by the appropriate Government. These Rules were amended by the notification dated 29.07.2011 and the minimum qualification prescribed for appointment as an Assistant Teacher for Classes I to V included, among others, a senior secondary (or its equivalent) certificate with at least 50% marks, and a two diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name know) or graduation with two year diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known); and a pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.
10. The minimum qualification prescribed by the NCTE does not restrict eligibility, for being considered for appointment as a teacher, only to those who obtained their diploma from an Institution within the State. It is, in this context, that the Division Bench, in its order in Special Appeal No. 239 of 2018 dated 27.04.2018, held that, as long as the qualification were recognized by the NCTE, it was not open to the State to stipulate, by its Rules, that the qualifications, obtained from within the State alone, would be accepted.
11. While Mr. Vikas Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State Government, would contend that, unlike in the present appeal where the respondents-writ petitioners had obtained his two years diploma certificate from institutions outside the State; and, therefore, the respondents-writ petitioners herein cannot compare themselves with the respondent-writ petitioner in Special Appeal No. 239 of 2018
12. We must express out inability to agree. The Division Bench, in its order in Special Appeal No. 239 of 2018 dated 27.04.2018, had examined whether the State could restrict, as an eligibility criteria, only those who had obtained their two year diploma course certificate from an Institution within the State, and not from outside. It is, in this context, that the Division Bench had, after taking note of the minimum qualification prescribed by the NCTE, held that the impugned Rules, which restrict the eligibility only to candidates who completed their two year diploma course from within the State, was illegal. Even otherwise, it is not as if the appellants herein are of the view that the two year diploma course from IGNOU should not be recognized, for they have themselves prescribed such a qualification as sufficient in the case of Shiksha 3 Mitras. This question is, as at present, merely academic, since the appellants have themselves recognized the need to bring their Rules in conformity with the minimum qualifications prescribed by the NCTE, as Section 23(1) of the 2009 Act makes any person, possessing the minimum qualifications stipulated by the NCTE, as eligible for appointment as a teacher.
13 Viewed from any angle, we see no reason to exercise discretion to interfere with the order under appeal. All the appeals fail and are accordingly, dismissed. No costs."
4. Since the respondent-writ petitioner possessed the prescribed qualification for being appointed as an Assistant Teacher the appellants were not justified in terminating his services after having appointing him as such.
5. Following the order passed by us in SPA No. 127 of 2019 dated 18.03.2019, and in terms thereof, this appeal is also dismissed. No costs.
6. Since we are disposing of the Special Appeal itself, we see no reason to grant time to appellants to rectify the deficiencies pointed out by the Registry.
(N.S. Dhanik, J.) (Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.)
22.04.2019 22.04.2019
Shiksha