Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 13, Cited by 3]

Chattisgarh High Court

Namita Diwan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 August, 2022

Author: Narendra Kumar Vyas

Bench: Narendra Kumar Vyas

                                                             Page 1 of 34

                                                                    AFR
         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
           Reserved On       : 22.07.2022, 25.07.2022 & 28.07.2022
            Delivered On     : 23.08.2022

                       WPS No. 5051 of 2021
     Namita Diwan, D/o Shri Chandan Singh Diwan, Aged About 27
     Years, R/o Bijrapali, Bhurkoni, Tehsil- Pithora, Mahasamund
     (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Principal Secretary,
     Department of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
     Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of School
     Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block - C, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar
     Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3.   Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of
     School Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block - C, 1 st Floor, Atal
     Nagar Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4.   Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Its
     Secretary, Shailendra Nagar - Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5.   Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Bastar Division
     (C.G.)
                                                     ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 2429 of 2022
     Vikas Kumar, S/o Shri Jugal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
     Village Ghumanidand, Post Jatga, Tahsil Pondi Uprora, Thana
     Bango, District- Korba (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon
     (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 2696 of 2022
     Pratima, S/o Late Shri Bharat Lal Verma, Aged About 31 Years,
     R/o Village and Post Anandgaon, Tahsil and Thana Berla,
     District- Bematara (C.G.)
                                                              Page 2 of 34

                                                           ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3582 of 2022
     Keshaw Kumari, D/o Shri Tilakdas, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
     Village Salonikaka, Tahsil Bhatgaon, District- Balodabazar-
     Bhatapara (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post Office and Police
     Station Rakhi, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Balodabazar, District - Balodabazar
     (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3862 of 2022
     Reetu Paikra, W/o Shri Vashudev Singh, Aged About 26 Years,
     R/o Village Sargaon, Post Salka, Tahsil and Thana Udaipur,
     District - Surguja (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3868 of 2022
     Ajay Kumar, S/o Shri Laxman Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
     Village Mungelidih, Post Gochhiya, Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara,
     Thana Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
                                                              Page 3 of 34

1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3884 of 2022
     Meena Toppo, D/o Shri Babulal Toppo, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
     Village Khedaaama, Post Lailunga, Tahsil and Thana Lailunga,
     District - Raigarh (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3888 of 2022
     Satishwar Prasad, S/o Shri Sonsai Ram, Aged About 42 Years,
     R/o Village Bachwar, Post Bachwar (Shankargarh), Tehsil
     Shankargarh, District- Balrampur (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through- The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and P.S. Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3900 of 2022
     Buddheswar Prasad Patel, S/o Shri Shankar Lal Patel, Aged
     About 37 Years, R/o Village Sarra, Post Deosundra, Tahsil
     Pallari, District - Balodabazar-Bhathapara (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                               Page 4 of 34

2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3901 of 2022
     Anita Markam, D/o Shri Sukhi Ram Markam, Aged About 28
     Years, R/o Village Dandbachhali, Post Tenganmada, Tahsil
     Belgahna, Thana Kota, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3904 of 2022
     Sonsai Sahu, S/o Shri Ramat Lal Sahu, Aged About 35 Years,
     R/o Village Ganesh Khapri, Post Mahrum, Thana Deori Tahsil
     Dondi, Thana Deori, Tahsil Dondi Lohara, District- Balod (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3931 of 2022
     Preetam Lal Padoti, S/o Late Shri Ramratan Padoti, Aged About
     43 Years, R/o Village Patheshri, Post Tumdibod, Tahsil
     Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                               Page 5 of 34

                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3933 of 2022
     Manees Kumar Meshram, S/o Shri Gorelal Meshram, Aged
     About 34 Years, R/o Village and Post Kodikasa, Tahsil Ambagarh
     Chowki, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 3947 of 2022
     Shailendra Kumar Verma, S/o Shri Aatma Ram, Aged About 37
     Years, R/o Village Kurlu, Post Parpodi, Tahsil Saja, District -
     Bemetara (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District - Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4027 of 2022
     Jai Prakash Sahu, S/o Shri Kamlesh Sahu, Aged About 30
     Years, R/o Ajad Chowk, Village and Post Kendri Block and Tahsil
     Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                                                               Page 6 of 34

                       WPS No. 4183 of 2022
     Shailesh Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Ramdeni Singh, Aged About 26
     Years, R/o Village and Post Chandranagar, Tahsil Ramanujganj,
     District - Balrampur (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, PO and PS Rakhi,
     Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4340 of 2022
     Kundan Singh, S/o Shri Bisalik Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
     Village Gahira-Nawagaon, Post Khertha Bazar, Tahsil Dondi
     Lohara, District- Balod (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education
     Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post and Police Station
     Rakhi, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Raipur, District- Raipur
     (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4475 of 2022
     Deepak Kumar Kumbhkar, S/o Shanker Lal, Aged About 39
     Years, R/o Village- Kharora, Tah.-Tilda, P.S. Kharora, District-
     Raipur (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department of
     School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan Nawa - Raipur, Atal Nagar,
     District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Department of School
     Education, Govt. of C.G., Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal
     Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                        WPS No. 4636 of 2022
     Tej Singh Paikra, S/o Raisingh Paikra, Aged About 36 Years,
                                                               Page 7 of 34

     Meel Para Bendarchuwa, Post Kodgar, Tahsil Pendra, District-
     Bilaspur, Now Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Principal Secretary,
     Department of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
     Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of School
     Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block-C, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar,
     Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3.   Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Department of
     School Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block-C, 1st Floor, Atal
     Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4.   Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Its
     Secretary, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5.   District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4641 of 2022
     Bhoj Pratap Singh, S/o Shankar Singh, Aged About 41 Years,
     R/o House No. 126, Ward No. 10, Nawaripara Shankargarh
     Pithampur, Pendra, District- Bilaspur, Now Gaurela- Pendra-,
     District - Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Principal Secretary,
     Department of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
     Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Department of School
     Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block- C, 1st Floor Atal Nagar,
     Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
3.   Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Department of
     School Education, Indrawati Bhawan Block- C, 1 st Floor, Atal
     Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)
4.   Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Its
     Secretary, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5.   District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 5460 of 2021
     Purnima, D/o Vishnu Dayal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Maa
     Sharda Residency, Mopka, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
                                                             Page 8 of 34

1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department of
     Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal
     Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2.   Director Directorate, Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan,
     Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3.   District Education Officer Kabirdham, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4594 of 2022
     Abhishek Kumar Nirmalkar, S/o Ramkumar Nirmalkar, Aged
     About 36 Years, R/o Pathak Para, Takhatpur Ward No. 6, Police
     Station Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur,
     District - Raipur (C.G.)
2.   The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
     Raipur (C.G.)
3.   The District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4691 of 2022
     Reena Dehare, W/o Shri Bhagyesh Kumar Sahu, Aged About 39
     Years, R/o M.I.G.- 69 Kabir Nagar Tatibandh, Police Station
     Tatibandh, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur
     (C.G.)
2.   The Director, Public Education Directorate Raipur, District-
     Raipur (C.G.)
3.   The District Education Officer Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                      ---- Respondents
                       WPS No. 4683 of 2022
     Satish Kumar Sahu, S/o Baijnath Sahu, Aged About 34 Years,
     R/o Village -Kosla, Block Pamgarh, District- Janjgri-Champa
     (C.G.)
                                                          ---- Petitioner
                               Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur,
     District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                               Page 9 of 34

2.   The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
     Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3.   The District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                        WPS No. 4602 of 2022
     Sukhdev Prasad Lahre, S/o Narad Lal Lahre, Aged About 37
     Years, R/o Village - Lohrakot, Block - Jaijaipur, District - Janjgir -
     Champa (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur
     (C.G.)
2.   The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
     Raipur (C.G.)
3.   The District Education Officer Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                        WPS No. 4597 of 2022
     Onkar Prasad Sahu, S/o Harishchandra Sahu, Aged About 43
     Years, R/o Utai, Post Utai, Block Drug, District- Durg (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantrala, Nawa Raipur (C.G.)
2.   The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
     Raipur (C.G.)
3.   The District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                                  AND
                        WPS No. 4606 of 2022
     Rekhlal, S/o Ramnarayan, Aged About 35 Years, Resident of
     Morid, Post - Dundera, Block Patan, District- Durg (C.G.)
                                                           ---- Petitioner
                                Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education
     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur
     (C.G.)
2.   The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Atal Nagar, New
     Raipur (C.G.)
3.   The District Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
                                                       ---- Respondents
                                                            Page 10 of 34

For Petitioners           : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Mr. Ghanshyam
                            Kashyap, Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Mr. Faisal
                            Akhtar, Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Mr. Anchal
                            Kumar Matre, Mr. Purnendra Khichariya,
                            Advocates.
For State                 : Mr. Amrito Das, Additional A.G., Mr.
                            Sandeep Dubey, Dy. A.G. & Mr. Sunita
                            Jain, Govt. Advocate. & Mr. Ravi Bhagat,
                            Dy. Govt. Advocate.
C.G. Examination Board : Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pandey & Mr. Anadi
                         Sharma, Advocates.
              Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
                           C.A.V. ORDER

1.   As a common question of law and facts are involved in all the
      aforesaid bunch of Writ Petitions, they are heard analogously
      and are being disposed of by this common order. For sake of
      convenience WPS No. 5051 of 2021 is being treated as lead
      case.
2.   WPS No. 5051 of 2021, WPS No. 3884 of 2022, WPS No. 3868
      of 2022, WPS No. 3900 of 2022, WPS No. 4027 of 2022, WPS
      No. 2696 of 2022, WPS No. 3582 of 2022, WPS No. 3901 of
      2022, WPS No. 2429 of 2022, WPS No. 3862 of 2022, WPS No.
      5460 of 2021, WPS No. 3931 of 2022, WPS No. 4183 of 2022,
      WPS No. 3888 of 2022, WPS No. 3933 of 2022, WPS No. 3904
      of 2022, WPS No. 3947 of 2022 & WPS No. 4340 of 2022 were
      reserved for orders on 22.07.2022. WPS No. 4475 of 2022,
      WPS No. 4636 of 2022 & WPS No. 4641 of 2022 were reserved
      for orders on 25.07.2022. WPS No. 4594 of 2022, WPS No.
      4691 of 2022, WPS No. 4683 of 2022, WPS No. 4602 of 2022,
      WPS No. 4597 of 2022 & WPS No. 4606 of 2022 were reserved
      for orders on 28.07.2022.
3.   The petitioners have filed the present petitions against the
      impugned order (Annexure-P/1) by which the candidature of the
      petitioners through direct recruitment for the post of Assistant
      Teacher/Teacher has been rejected on the count that the
      petitioners have secured less than 50% marks in Higher
      Secondary or in the Graduation as the case may be.
                                                                        Page 11 of 34

4.   The facts reflected from the record are that respondent No. 2 has
     issued an advertisement for appointment on the post of Assistant
     Teacher (E Cadre), Assistant Teacher (T Cadre), State Cadre,
     Division Cadre & District Cadre posts. The advertisement was
     issued for Lecturer, Teacher, Assistant Teacher, Assistant
     Teacher (Science), Assistant Teacher (Laboratory), Assistant
     Teacher (English), Assistant Teacher (English Medium Arts
     Group), Assistant Teacher (English Medium Science Group).
     Clause (1) of the advertisement provides eligibility criteria for
     direct recruitment. The minimum qualification for various posts
     has been prescribed in the advertisement which are as under:-
           "2-     U;wu re 'kS { kf.kd vgZ r k;sa%& vH;FkhZ ds ikl lsok ds
           fy;s fuEukuqlkj U;wure 'kS{kf.kd vgZrk,W gksuk vko';d gS%&
           (,d) lgk;d f'k{kd
           (d) U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok
           blds led{k) rFkk izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (pkgs mls fdlh Hkh uke
           ls tkuk tkrk gks) esa f+}o"khZ; fMIyksek
                                      vFkok
           U;wure 45% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds
           led{k) ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (pkgs mls fdlh Hkh uke ls tkuk
           tkrk gks) esa f+}o"khZ; fMIyksek tks jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn
           (ekU;rk] ekun.M vkSj fdz;kfof/k) fofu;e] 2002 ds vuqlkj izkIr
           fd;k x;k gksA
                                      vFkok
           U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds
           led{k) ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (ch-,y-,M-) esa pkj o"khZ; Lukrd
                                      vFkok
           U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds
           led{k) rFkk izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (fo'ks"k f'k{kk'kkL=) esa f}o"khZ;
           fMIyksek
                                      vFkok
           Lukrd rFkk izkjafHkd f'k{kk'kkL= (pkgs mls fdlh Hkh uke ls
           tkuk tkrk gks) esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek
                                      vFkok
           U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk Lukrd rFkk ch-,M- vgZrk (jk"Vªh;
           v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn ls ekU;rk izkIr laaLFkku ls Lukrd) Hkh
           d{kk 1 ls 5 rd i<+kus ds fy;s v/;kid ds #i esa ik= gksaxs
           ijUrq ;g fd mls fu;qfDr ds i'pkr jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk
           ifj"kn }kjk ekU;rk izkIr izkFkfed f'k{kk'kkL= esa 6 eghus ds ,d
           fo'ks"k dk;Zdze iwjk djuk gksXkkA
                                        rFkk
           ([k) jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn }kjk bl iz;kstu ds fy;s
                                                                      Page 12 of 34

             tkjh fd;s x;s ekXkZn'khZ fl}karks ds vuqlkj leqfpr ljdkj }kjk
             vk;ksftr v/;kid ik=rk ijh{kk (Vh-bZ-Vh-) esa mRrh.kZA
             Vhi%& 1- mPprj ek/;fed vFkok led{k ijh{kk foKku fo"k; ds
             lkFk mijksDr ekin.M esa mRrh.kZ gksuk vko';d gksxkA d`f"k
             ladk; ds lkFk mPPkrj ek/;fed ijh{kk mRrh.kZ djus ij mls
             foKku ladk; esa ekU; fd;k tk;sxkA O;olkf;d f'k{kk ls mPprj
             ek/;fed ijh{kk mRrh.kZ vH;FkhZ dks ik=rk ugha gksxkA
             2- lgk;d f'k{kd vaxzsth ek/;e ds inksa gsrq vF;FkhZ dks vaxzsth
             ek/;e ls mPprj ek/;fed (vFkok blds led{k) ijh{kk mRrh.kZ
             gksuk vko';d gksxk rFkk 'ks"k ekin.M mDr fcanq 2-(,d) lgk;d
             f'k{kd gsrq fu/kkZfjr vuqlkj gksuk vko';d gSA
             3- lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx ds ifji= dzekad ,Q
             13&55@2012@20&rhu jk;iqj fnukad 10-01-2013 ds }kjk fo'ks"k
             fiNM+h tutkfr;ksa dks Mh-,M- ,oa Vh-bZ-Vh- ls fu;qfDr ds le;
             NwV jgsxhA
             4- lgk;d f'k{kd ds in gsrq d{kk igyh ls ikapoh rd v/;kiu
             gsrq Vh-bZ-Vh- mRrh.kZ gksuk vko';d gSA"
5.   Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
     petitioners are having qualification like Higher Secondary,
     Certificate of Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), B.Ed., D.Ed. and
     other    qualifications     as   prescribed      in   the    advertisement,
     therefore, they have participated in the selection examination
     and cleared the examination. Accordingly, they were called for
     verification of records. After verification of the records, their claim
     for appointment has been rejected on the count that the
     petitioners have secured less than 50% marks either in the
     Higher Secondary or Graduation Examination, which are
     required for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher,
     Teacher as the case may be.

6.   Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that since the
     petitioners     belong     to    ST    category,      therefore,     as   per
     advertisement and recruitment rules namely Chhattisgarh
     School Education Services (Education and Administrative
     Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019, they are
     entitled to get relaxation from the minimum percentage of 50%.
     Learned counsel for the petitioners would refer to clause 5 of the
     advertisement, which reads as under:-

             "5-  inks gsr q vkj{k.k %&
             (1) lsok esa HkrhZ ds le;] NRrhlx<+ yksd lsok (vuqlwfpr
                                                                        Page 13 of 34

            tkfr;ksa] vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa vkSj vU; fiNM+s oxksZa ds fy,
            vkj{k.k) vf/kfu;e] 1994 (dz- 21 lu~ 1994) ds mica/k rFkk mDr
            vf/kfu;e ds v/khu] 'kklu ds lkekU; iz'kklu foHkkx }kjk
            le;&le; ij tkjh funsZ'k ykxw gksaxsA
            (2) NRrhlx<+ flfoy lsok (efgykvksa dh fu;qfDr ds fy, fo'ks"k
            mica/k) fu;e] 1997 ds mica/k ds vuqlkj efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa ds
            fy;s 30 izfr'kr in vkjf{kr j[ks tk;saxsA ;g vkj{k.k] leLrj
            vkSj izHkkxokj gksXkkA fu;e ds mica/k ds v/;/khu jgrs gq,]
            fu;qfDr;ksa esa fo/kok vFkok rykd'kqnk efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa dks
            vf/keku fn;k tk;sxkA
            (3) mijksDr ds vfrfjDr] fnO;kaxtu@HkwriwoZ lSfud ds fy;s inksa
            dks]     'kklu       }kjk    le;&le;           ij    cuk;s       x;s
            vf/kfu;e@fu;e@tkjh vkns'k@funsZ'k ds vuqlkj vkjf{kr j[kk
            tk;sxkA fnO;kaxtu vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2016 (2016 dk la- 49)
            ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr jkT; essa ykxw izfr'kr ds vuqlkj] inksa dk
            vkj{k.k] 7 izfr'kr jgsxkA"
7.   Learned counsels for the petitioners would further submit that as
     per Section 29 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory
     Education Act, 2009 (for shot "the Act, 2009"), there will be an
     academic authority who will lying down the curriculum and
     evaluation procedure under sub-section 1 and as per Rule 23 of
     the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules,
     2010 (for shot "the Rules, 2010"),                   the State Council of
     Educational Research & Training, Raipur (SCERT) has been
     designated as an academic authority for the State of
     Chhattisgarh to carry out various responsibilities such as
     formulation of curriculum, preparation of textbooks, teachers'
     handbooks and teacher training. It advises the Government on
     policy matter relating to school education.

8.   Learned counsels for the petitioners would submit that the State
     Council of Education Research & Training, Raipur has issued
     guidelines for eligibility criteria to admission in B.Ed. Course in
     which, it has been categorically mentioned that minimum 50%
     marks is required in graduation/post-graduation examination to
     admission in B.Ed. Course and 5% relaxation granted to the
     SC/ST/OBC/PH candidates of State of Chhattisgarh. It has also
     been contended that the Government of Chhattisgarh had
     conducted Teacher Eligibility Test in the year 2011, 2012, 2016,
     & 2019 as per "Chhattisgarh Teacher Eligibility Test guidelines"
                                                            Page 14 of 34

     the said Guidelines was framed as per the Guidelines of
     National Council of Teacher Education, in which, it has been
     categorically mentioned that relaxation upto 5% in the
     qualification marks shall be allowed to the candidates belonging
     to reserved categories.

9.   It has been further contended that as per the guidelines of
     National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), State Council of
     Education Research & Training, Raipur & Chhattisgarh B.Ed.
     Admission Rules, 2006, the reserved category candidates who
     have minimum 45% marks in graduation and also have B.Ed.
     degree are eligible for appointment to the post of Assistant
     Teacher and the petitioners belong to the Schedule Tribe
     category, therefore, they are eligible to get relaxation of 5% from
     the minimum qualifying marks in the Higher Secondary or
     Graduation Course. Since they have cleared TET, B.Ed./D.Ed.
     and other professional qualification, which is required for
     appointment    of Assistant    Teacher/Teacher,    therefore,   the
     rejection of candidature of petitioners on the count that the
     petitioners are having less than 50% marks, is arbitrary, illegal
     and contrary to the guidelines of NCTE & guidelines/circular of
     State of Chhattisgarh. It has been further contended that as per
     the Rule 8(II) of Chhattisgarh School Education Services
     (Education    and   Administrative   Cadre)    Recruitment      and
     Promotion Rules, 2019, the prescribed qualification will be as
     per the provisions of Right to Free and Compulsory Education
     Act, 2009. It has also been contended that the National Council
     for Teaching Education is academic authority under Right to Free
     and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which has granted
     relaxation up to 5% of qualifying marks vide notification dated
     29.07.2011 for various reserved categories, therefore, the State
     cannot make a rule contrary to the NCTE rules/guidelines and
     would submit that the impugned order by which, their
     candidature for appointment has been rejected, be kindly set
     aside and the State be directed to issue appointment order in
                                                                 Page 15 of 34

        favour of the petitioners.

10.     The petitioners to substantiate their submissions have referred to
        the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of
        State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak & others 1, as
        well as Vikas Sankhala & others Vs. Vikas Kumar Agarwal &
        others2, and referred paragraph 32, 45 & 46 of Vikas Sankhala
        (Supra), which are extracted below:-

                "32. Coming to notification dated July 29, 2011
                which was issued by the NCTE in exercise of its
                power under Section 23(1) of the RTE Act,
                amending its earlier notification dated August 23,
                2010, the High Court proceeded to discuss as to
                whether relaxation upto 5% in qualifying marks
                contained therein was relatable to TET. This
                question had arisen for consideration because of
                the reason that writ petitioners belonging to
                general category had argued that vide said
                notification dated July 29, 2011 paragraph 3 of the
                principal notification dated August 23, 2010 was
                substituted and the context of the said paragraph 3
                was totally different. After juxtaposing unamended
                paragraph 3 and amended paragraph 3, the High
                Court pointed out that paragraph 3 of the
                notification dated August 23, 2010 dealt exclusively
                with the aspect of NCTE recognised six months
                special programme in elementary education by
                way of training of persons with qualifications
                mentioned therein after appointment. Thus, there
                was neither any comprehension nor any provision
                for reservation or relaxation of marks. Only
                academic qualifications with minimum percentage
                of marks was referred to. Therefore, concession of
                5% in the qualifying marks pertained to the
                percentage of marks in the qualifying examination
                of Senior Secondary/graduation etc. and had no
                nexus with the pass marks in the TET.
                45. We find merit in the contention of the
                appellants and do not agree with the respondents
                that the provision for relaxation upto 5% in
                qualifying marks at all relates to TET. In the first
                instance, it is to be noted that insofar as qualifying
                marks for TET are concerned, they are prescribed
                in para 9 of the guidelines dated February 11,
                2011. There is no amendment to the said para.
                Amendment is incorporated in para 3 of the
1   (2018) 12 SCC 595
2   (2017) 1 SCC 350
                                                Page 16 of 34

principal notification dated February 11, 2011
which we have already reproduced above. Original
para 3 gives the rationale for including TET as a
minimum qualification. Though, it is not understood
as to why that para is substituted by the aforesaid
amended para vide notification dated July 29,
2011. Be that as it may, a reading of amended
para 3 clearly brings out that it incorporates two
aspects. First aspect touches upon the training to
be undergone by a person and this training can be
undergone by those persons who have certain
specified marks in graduation and D.Ed. (Special
Education) or B.Ed. (Special Education). Training
is for 6 months duration i.e. 6 months special
programme in elementary education. Insofar as
persons having graduation and B.Ed. qualification
are concerned, minimum marks in the graduation
or B.Ed. are also prescribed. It is stipulated that
graduation should be with at least 50% marks and
B.Ed. qualification with at least 45% marks.
However, those who have done D.Ed. (Special
Education) or B.Ed. (Special Education), no
minimum marks in obtaining those qualifications
are prescribed. What follows is that person who is
graduate with B.Ed. qualification, he/she should
have minimum 50% marks in graduation and 45%
marks in B.Ed. qualification. It is in this context
second aspect of the amended provision in sub-
para (ii) of para 3 mentions about 'Reservation
Policy' and allows relaxation upto 5% in qualifying
marks. This relaxation is, therefore, clearly
relatable to marks in graduation and B.Ed.
qualification, meaning thereby insofar as reserved
category candidates such as SC/ST/OBC/PH are
concerned, they will be treated as qualified to
undergo the training in case they pass graduation
with minimum 45% marks and B.Ed. qualification
with minimum 40% marks. We are clear in mind
that this relaxation of 5% does not relate to TET at
all. Had it been so, this notification dated July 29,
2011 would have amended para 9 and,
particularly, sub-para (a) of para 9 which deals with
concessions to reserved category candidates that
has not happened and is left intact.
46. We may mention that High Court in the
impugned judgment has also read the said
amended para 3 in the same manner we have
interpreted. We affirm the view of the High Court
on this specific aspect. We would like to reproduce
the following discussion from the judgment of the
High Court wherein additional reasons for arriving
                                                              Page 17 of 34

             at this particular conclusion are given:
             "...This view is fortified by the letter No. F.No.61-
             1/2011/NCTE/N&S dated 1.4.2011 of the NCTE
             addressed, amongst others, to all Secretaries and
             Commissioners of the State Governments/UTs
             clarifying that following the issuance of the
             notification dated 23.8.2010, it had received
             representations from the State Government and
             other stakeholders that in respect of SCs/STs etc.
             relaxation upto 5% in the qualifying marks should
             be allowed, since such relaxation is permissible by
             the NCTE for admission in various teacher
             education courses. Referring to the minimum
             marks in the notification dated 23.8.2010, in senior
             secondary (or its equivalent) or in B.A./B.Sc., it
             was elucidated that following its meeting held on
             16.3.2011 it was decided that relaxation upto 5% in
             such qualifying marks would be available to
             SCs/STs etc., in accordance with the extant policy
             of the State Government /UTs and other school
             managements. There is no reference of such
             relaxation to pass marks in the TET. This
             accommodation of the NCTE, by way of
             concession of 5% marks qua the academic
             qualifications, is also evident from the provisions of
             the National Council for Teacher Education
             (Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations,
             2009 (hereinafter referred to as '2009 Regulations')
             and the norms and standards for various education
             courses as specified in the Appendices thereto and
             referred to in the course of arguments on its
             behalf. The explanation of the NCTE with regard to
             the nature of the relaxation granted under the
             caption "reservation policy" traceable to paragraph
             3 of the principal notification dated 23.8.2010 with
             reference amongst others to the 2009 Regulations
             cannot be ignored or discarded."

11.   Learned Additional Advocate General for the State would submit
      that under Section 23 of the Act, 2009, the NCTE has laid down
      the minimum eligibility qualification vide notification dated
      23.08.2010. Para 1(i) of the said notification laid down the
      minimum qualification prescribed for appointment of a candidate
      to teach Classes I to V. Clause 1 (ii) prescribed the minimum
      qualification for appointment of a candidate to teach Class VI to
      VIII. The said notification was subsequently amended vide
      notification   dated   29.07.2011    prescribing    the   minimum
                                                                Page 18 of 34

qualification for teaching Class I to V as was provided under
Clause 1(i) and for Classes VI to VII under Clause 1(ii). The said
notification was further partially modified vide notification dated
13.11.2019, whereby Clause 1(ii) was amended. The relevant
provision of the notification dated 23.08.2010 is extracted
below:-
      "1- U;wure ;ksX;rk &
      ¼i½ d{kk I-V
      ¼d½ U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds
      led{k½ ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek ¼ftl uke
      ls Hkh tkuk tkrk gks½
                                     ;k
      U;wure 45% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
      ,oa izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek ¼ftl uke ls Hkh
      tkuk tkrk gks½] tks jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ ¼ekU;rk] ekud
      vkSj fdz;kfof/k½ fofu;e] 2002 ds vuqlkj izkIr fd;k x;k gksA
                                     ;k
      U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
      ,oa 4 o"khZ; izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= Lukrd ¼ch-,y-,M½
                                     ;k
      U;wure 50% vadks ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
      ,oa f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ; fMIyksek ¼fo'ks"k f'k{kk½
                                    vkSj
      ¼[k½ jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ }kjk fu:fir ekxZn'khZ
      fl)kUrksa ds v/khu mi;qDr ljdkjksa }kjk vk;ksftr [v/;kid
      ik=rk ijh{kk ¼Vh-bZ-Vh-½ esa mRrh.kZ]A
      ¼ii½ d{kk VI-VII
      ¼d½ ch-,-@ch-,l-lh- vkSj izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= esa f}o"khZ;
      fMIyksek ¼ftl uke ls Hkh tkuk tkrk gks½
                                     ;k
      U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk ch-,-@ch-,l-lh- ,oa f'k{kk 'kkL=
      esa ,d o"khZ; Lukrd ¼ch-,M-½
                                     ;k
      U;wure 45% vadksa ds lkFk ch-,-@ch-,l-lh- ,oa f'k{kk 'kkL=
      esa ,do"khZ; Lukrd ¼ch-,M½ tks bl laca/k esa le;&le; ij
      tkjh jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ ¼ekU;rk] ekud vkSj
      fdz;kfof/k½ fofu;e ds vuqlkj izkIr fd;k x;k gks
                                     ;k
      U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
      ,oa 4 o"khZ; izkjafHkd f'k{kk 'kkL= Lukrd ¼ch-,y-,M-½
                                     ;k
      U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk mPprj ek/;fed ¼;k blds led{k½
      ,oa 4 o"khZ; ch-,-@ch-,llh- ,M- ;k ch-,-,M-@ch-,llh-,M-
                                     ;k
      U;wure 50% vadksa ds lkFk ch-,-@ch-,llh- ,oa ,do"khZ; ch-,M-
      ¼fo'ks"k f'k{kk½
                                    vkSj
                                                                 Page 19 of 34

               ¼[k½ jk"Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj"kn~ }kjk fu:fir ekxZn'khZ
               fl)kUrksa ds v/khu mi;qDr ljdkjksa }kjk vk;ksftr [v/;kid
               ik=rk ijh{kk ¼Vh-bZ-Vh-½ esa mRrh.kZ]A"
12.   He would further submit that the State of Chhattisgarh in its
      exercise of power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India,
      has   framed       the   Chhattisgarh    School   Education     Service
      (Educational & Administrative Cadre) Recruitment & Promotion
      Rules,     2019,    prescribing    the   minimum     qualification   for
      appointment of an Assistant Teacher, Teacher and Lecturer.
      Under the Rules, the minimum qualification has been prescribed
      in Annexure-A attached with the Recruitment Rules, 2019.
      Relevant clause of Annexure-I of the Rules, 2019 is reproduced
      below:-

      (i)   Assistant Teacher
            (a)  Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least
            50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary
            Education (by whatever name known)
                                          OR
            Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 45%
            marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by
            whatever name known), 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
            Graduation and two year Diploma in Elementary (by
            whatever name known)
                                          OR
            Graduation with at least 50% makrs and B.Ed.
            Qualification (Graduation from the institution recognized
            from NCTE), shall also be eligible for appointment as
            teacher for classes 1 to 5, Provided he/she undergoes,
            after appointment, a NCTE recognized 6 months
            special programme in Elementary Education.
                                                             Page 20 of 34

                                       And
             (b)    Passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be
             conducted by the appropriate Government, in
             accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE for
             this purpose.
      (ii)   Teacher
             (a)  Graduation and 2 Year Diploma in Elementary
             Education (by what ever name known)
                                       OR
             Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1 Year
             Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.)
                                       OR
             Graduation with at least 45% marks and 1-year
             Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.), in accordance with the
             NCTE     (Recognition,     Norms     and      Procedure)
             Regulations issued from time to time in this regard.
                                       OR
             Higher Secondary or its equivalent with at least 50%
             marks and 4 years B.A./B.Sc.Ed. Or B.A.Ed./B.Sc.Ed.
                                       OR
             Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1 year B.Ed.
             (Special Graduation)
                                       OR
             (b)   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.
13.   He would further submit that the petitioners are claiming
      relaxation of 5% relaxation which was provided as per the
      notification dated 29.07.2011 and as per Clause 3 (ii) though
      Para III of the notification dated 29.07.2011 is pertaining to the
      amendment made in para 3 of the principle notification dated
      23.08.2010. He would further submit that Para 3 of the
      notification dated 23.08.2010 dealt with training to be undergone
      and does not pertain to the minimum qualifications required for
      appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher.
14.   He would submit that from bare perusal of the said notification, it
      is quite vivid that relaxation upto 5% in the qualifying marks was
      allowed to the candidates belonging to the reserved category for
      taking admission in B.Ed./D.Ed. course and does not relate to
                                                             Page 21 of 34

      grant of relaxation of 5% for securing employment with the State
      as the appointment governs by the Rules, 2009. He would
      further submit that the petitioners are trying to mix both the
      relaxation and even the petitioners cannot claim relaxation of 5%
      as a matter of right. Since it is a policy decision to be taken by
      the appointing authority or the appropriate government, would
      pray for dismissal for the writ petitions. In support of this
      contention, he would refer to the judgment rendered by Hon'ble
      the Supreme Court in State of U.P. Vs. Vikash Kumar
      Singh3, wherein it has been held as Paragraph 7.1 as under:-

             "7.1 The learned Single Judge thereafter while
             quashing and setting aside the eligibility lists dated
             18.03.2019 and 10.05.2019 has issued the writ of
             mandamus commanding or directing the competent
             authority to grant relaxation in qualifying service,
             which as such was permissible under Rule 4 of the
             Relaxation Rules, 2006. The word used in the
             Rule 4 of Relaxation Rules, 2006 is "MAY".
             Therefore, the relaxation may be at the discretion of
             the competent authority. The relaxation cannot be
             prayed as a matter of right. If a conscious decision
             is taken not to grant the relaxation, merely because
             Rule permits relaxation, no writ of mandamus can
             be issued directing the competent authority to grant
             relaxation in qualifying service. Therefore, the High
             Court has committed a grave error in issuing the
             writ of mandamus commanding the competent
             authority to grant relaxation in the qualifying
             service. Consequently, the High Court has also
             erred in quashing and setting aside the eligibility
             lists dated 18.03.2019 and 10.05.2019, which as
             such were prepared absolutely in consonance with
             the Rules, 1990 and Rules, 2006. The impugned
             judgments and orders passed by the learned Single
             Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High
             Court are not sustainable in law."
15.   He would further submit that the amendment as provided by way
      of notification dated 13.11.2019, is applicable to those
      incumbent who have already taken admission to the Bachelor of
      Education of Bachelor of Elementary Education or equivalent
      course prior to 29th July, 2011 and this notification is deemed to
      have come into force on 29th July, 2011. From the records, it is

3     (2022) 1 SCC 347
                                                               Page 22 of 34

      quite vivid that the petitioners who have applied for appointment
      to the post of teacher have not taken admission to the Bachelor
      of Education or Bachelor of Elementary Education or equivalent
      prior to 29th July, 2011, therefore, while considering their case for
      appointment on the post of teacher after giving relaxation from
      minimum percentage of marks in graduation cannot be
      considered. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners in
      WPS Nos. 2429/2022, 2696/2022, 3582/2022, 3862/2022,
      3884/2022, 3904/2022, 3900/2022, 3888/2022, 3868/2022,
      3901/2022, 3933/2022, 3931/2022, 3947/2022, 4183/2022,
      4027/2022 & 4340/2022 have completed their B.Ed./D.Ed. after
      2011 which varied from period between 2012 to 2019. He would
      further submit that this relaxation for appointment of teacher of
      teaching Classes VI to VIII has been provided and not for
      Assistant Teachers.

16.   I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
      documents placed on record with utmost satisfaction.

17.   The National Council for Teacher Education, which is the
      academic authority as per Section 29 of the Act, 2009, who is
      competent to lay down the minimum qualifications which a
      person needs to possess to make him eligible for appointment
      as a teacher, has issued a notification dated 23.08.2010 laying
      down such minimum qualifications, wherein, apart from the other
      educational qualifications prescribed in the said notification, the
      candidate should also secure qualifying marks in TET. The
      relevant portion of the notification reads as under:-

             "(b) 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."
18.   In furtherance of the notification dated 23.08.2010, the State of
      Chhattisgarh has issued guidelines titled as Chhattisgarh
      Teacher Eligibility Examination Direction, 2011. According to
      clause 2(v), the minimum pass percentage of TET is 50%. The
      direction further provides for 10% of relaxation to the
                                                                 Page 23 of 34

      SC/ST/OBC candidates. The relevant clause of the direction
      reads as under:-

             "(v) jkT; lsok ijh{kk ds izpfyr fu;ekuqlkj vuqlwfpr tkfr]
             vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks 10 % dh
             NwV nsrs gq, bl ijh{kk esa ik=rk gsrq 50 % U;wure vad ykuk
             vko';d gksxkA"
19.   From bare perusal for the aforesaid direction, it is evident that
      the authorities have conveyed its decision to grant relaxation in
      minimum pass marks in TET to reserved category candidates,
      the relaxation is 10%. Thus, even if the reserved category
      candidates secured only 40% marks in TET, they were still
      treated as a qualified candidate and were allowed to appear in
      the recruitment process.

20.   Hon'ble the Supreme Court while examining the correctness of
      granting relaxation in TET to SC/ST/OBC has observed in
      paragraphs No. 19, 38 & 47 in Vikas Sankhala (Supra), which
      read as under :

             "19.We may point out at the outset that insofar as
             issue of concession/relaxation in TET is concerned,
             it has three facets, viz.:
                (i) whether relaxation in passing marks for
                TET was validly given by the State
                Government in its letter dated March 23, 2011
                and all such candidates belonging to the
                reserved categories can be treated as having
                passed TET on obtaining marks as per
                relaxed standards?
                (ii) whether no relaxation of any nature could
                be given by the State Government and,
                therefore, it was incumbent upon the persons
                belonging to reserved categories as well to
                secure 60% marks in TET to treat them as
                qualifying the said TET? OR
                (iii) relaxation to the extent of 5% was
                permissible, as provided by NCTE vide its
                amendment Notification dated July 29, 2011
                and, therefore, those who secure 55% or
                above could be treated as successful in
                TET?"
             38. The history of events, right upto the decision of
             the High Court, gives a clear glimpse of the
             questions of law that need to be determined by this
                                                              Page 24 of 34

             Court. At this juncture, we would like to formulate
             these issues, as under:
                38.1 (i) Whether policy of the State as
                reflected in its letter dated March 23, 2011
                deciding to give relaxation ranging from 10%
                to 20% in TET marks to different reserved
                categories as mentioned therein is valid in
                law?
                38.2 (ii) Whether NCTE notification dated
                July 29, 2011, which amends paragraph 3 of
                its earlier guidelines/notification dated
                February 11, 2011, provides 5% relaxation to
                the reserved category for passing TET? If so,
                whether it would be applicable to the
                reserved categories in the State of Rajasthan
                as well?
                38.3 (iii) Whether reserved category
                candidates, who secured better than general
                category     candidates    in    recruitment
                examination, can be denied migration to
                general seats on the basis that they had
                availed relaxation in TET?
                47.Thus, our answer to Question No. 2 is that
                insofar as NCTE is concerned, it has not
                provided any provision for relaxation in TET
                examination     for    reserved     category
                candidates but has left it to the State
                Governments to do the needful in this behalf,
                as per para 9 of guidelines dated February
                11, 2011 which remains unaltered."
21.   From bare perusal of notifications of 2010 & 2011, it is quite vivid
      that the relaxation of 10% in qualifying marks was not given for
      recruitment process, but was granted for passing of TET
      examination. Thus, the passing of TET and appointment as per
      Rules, 2019 for appointment on the post of Assistant
      Teacher/Teacher are completely different and the petitioners
      cannot club both these things and claimed relaxation. It is quite
      vivid that so far as relaxation of passing TET is concerned, it was
      open to the State Government to give relaxation in favour of
      reserved category as per the policy framed by them from time to
      time with change in socio economic condition.

22.   Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that when the
      petitioners were found eligible to pursue B.Ed., they cannot be
                                                             Page 25 of 34

      held ineligible to be considered for appointment by granting
      relaxation. I am not persuaded by this submission as granting of
      relaxation in essential qualification will dilute the standard of
      education.

23.   Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of U.P. Vs. Anand Kumar
      Yadav4 has held at paragraph 24 as under:-

             "24. To make the right to education meaningful, a
             qualified teacher undoubtedly has significant role.
             In this regard we may quote with approval the
             following observations dealing with the importance
             of a trained teacher in the Full Bench judgment of
             the High Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma(supra):
                "55. ... ... ...The training of a child, that is an
                integral part of child development, is
                essential for his grooming, as a human mind,
                without proper training is like a horse without
                a bridle difficult to ride. Children in their
                cradle of life with the help of teachers can
                mould their lives for higher ambitions in their
                manhood. To assess and mould children with
                these ideals is the job of a skilled teacher and
                the art of such skill is pedagogy. Teachers
                have to serve the larger interest of the
                society as they are building the future. Henry
                Brooks Adams said, "A teacher affects
                eternity; he can never tell where his influence
                stops" and more appropriately Christa
                Mcauliffe said " I touch the future. I teach".
                This requires the possession of virtues like
                sacrifice and honour which in turn brings
                respect to the status of a teacher and infuses
                confidence in the pupil.
                56. Many children are victims of apathy and
                wrongly motived parental treatment. Their
                emotional and skilful assessment, and proper
                treatment, has to be handled within the clinic
                of an elementary school where the sole
                physician is none else than a trained teacher.
                A candidate possessing a mere educational
                or a training qualification without any genuine
                attribute may not necessarily be a good
                teacher.
                57. It is in this background that one may
                remember those who have contributed to this
                skilful art of pedagogy. In the modern world

4     (2018) 13 SCC 560
                                              Page 26 of 34

the great philosopher and Educationist
Rousseau,      followed     by    the   Swiss
Predecessor of his German Pupils,
Pestalozzi, are worth remembering. They
were followed by the famous Germans
Herbart and Froebel. The English with
Lancaster and Bell followed suit and in the
modern world it would be improper to forget
the great contributions of Maria Montessori.
58. We do not wish to pile up names but this
is only to emphasize that a great scientific
contribution has been made to this skilful art
of pedagogy. If one goes through the works
of these great people, one can understand
that child evelopment and teaching children
is no easy task and cannot be confined with
the acquisition of a couple of degrees as a
supplement to the complete attribute required
of a teacher. The narrow meaning of
qualification therefore that was being pressed
into service by Sri Rahul Agrawal cannot be
countenanced in view of the vast ocean of
understanding that is required of a skilful
teacher.
59. In the instant case the skill of the teacher
should be lined with such ingredients that it
kindles the spark of a child and balances a
group of mentally uneven children. The duty
of a good teacher is to bring the student into
contact with the learning of fruitful elements
that ensue an enduring significance in life,
affirmative information of all modes of
intellectual, systematical and practical activity
that play a major part in the building of
human mind and spirit. Their interplay is the
exercise that has to be undertaken by a
teacher. This exercise, particularly, in a class
room of infants should be underlined with
methods that are elastic enough to fit the
varying needs of different types of children.
The cultivation of mental training and
discipline is the prime object of good
teaching. We celebrate 5th of September
each year as Teachers' Day to commemorate
the birth of our late President Dr. S.
Radhakrishnan. He defined the good
qualities of a teacher as follows:
A good teacher must know how to arouse the
interest of the pupil in the field of study for
which he is responsible, he must himself be a
                                              Page 27 of 34

master in the field and be in touch with the
latest developments in his subject, he must
himself be a fellow traveler in the exciting
pursuit of knowledge ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
...

61. Describing the role model of teachers, our Former President of India Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, narrated his experience in his teachers' day speech on 5th September, 2003 and said that a school must have the best of teachers who have the ability to teach, love teaching and build moral qualities.

62. These are the challenges of teaching which have been referred to in the guidelines dated 11th February, 2011. It is in order to ensure that the candidate is possessed of such attributes. The guidelines further provide that a candidate will be presumed to have succeeded in the test if he scores 60% or more. Some confessions have been given for reduction in the said percentage in the case of scheduled caste, scheduled tribes, and other backward classes as well as differently abled persons.

63. The reason for this is that the art of teaching is designed to educate a child. Education is not mere acquisition of qualifications but is an overall development of a child to ensure growth and development. It is the awakening of the inner self and faculty of the child to the ways of the world. The teacher therefore should be possessed such qualities that he satisfies the curiosity of a child that enables him not only to read but to distinguish what is worth reading. The job of a teacher is not to fill the time-table with dull unintelligible tasks. This violates common sense and creativity brutally. Teaching and training cannot be effected in the absence of knowledge about the mind which is to receive them.

64. It is the systematic and purposeful construction of a personality, so that it leaves an everlasting effect on the mind. The job of a teacher is to get across the confidence in a pupil, that there were good reasons for everything the teacher did. He has to be transparent and he cannot leave a pupil to guess that there are any hidden answers. A Page 28 of 34 good teacher would like the pupil to lead the way. The teacher would follow and let the pupil know that his efforts would be recognised. This confidence would help the child to develop a strength in himself to cope up with his own world by observing and solving problems. The art of teaching should not be confined only to oral transmissions because what one hears one can forget. However, what one sees, one remembers but what one. does he understands. This is what should teaching be comprised of. The teacher should therefore be in a position to infuse into a child such attributes that he or she acquires the ability to assume responsibility for himself/herself. A psychological independence that enables him/her to decide at the same time and differentiate right from wrong. This capacity of a child which lies concealed in him has to be discovered in a way that the child finds this world an interesting place to live in. For this good teaching may be 1/4th preparation and 3/4th performance.

65. A teacher is like a professional as said by Danny Hillis, "A layman knows he has to kick it; and an amateur knows where to kick it; a professional knows how hard." This quality should be possessed professionally by a teacher as the object of teaching a child is to enable him to get alone without a teacher.

66. The skill of such a performance has to be assessed because teaching is a great art to educate youth to enable him to find out and discover his own peculiar aptitudes or create where none exists. A teacher has to create inclinations in the child which may serve as substitutes. The level of inspiration that has to be infused in a child should be such that he is able to make a mark in life as a complete human being. One should remember that "millions see the apple fall, but Newton was the one to ask why?" The job of a teacher at the primary level is to generate this element of curiosity in a child.

67. For this teachers have to be attributed with qualities that they are able to handle the weak and the nervous, the mediocre and intelligent with measured skill. This expertise is a onerous task and is a substantial part of Page 29 of 34 pedagogy. To teach a child to become self sufficient is the art which has to be developed with caution so as not to destroy the fragile confidence by using harsh methods. The teacher eligibility test appears to be designed for this purpose.

68. It is to be remembered that teachers are to impart education to those souls who are between the period of innocence of childhood and the folly of youth. It is this aspect of pedagogy to educate a child to lead life that attains importance.

69. The art of dealing with children also involves knowing what not to say, and on the other hand patiently answering the unpredictable questions of an inquisitive child. A teacher should not give answers to children to remember only, but he should be able to give them problems to solve. It is then that the potentiality of the human race is better put to use "because a child is not a vase to be filled but a fire to be lit." (Francois Rabelais) . A Chinese Proverb goes a long way to say "give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." Teaching is infusing of ideas instead of stuffing the brain with facts. William Arthur Ward a famous educationist said that The mediocre teacher tells, a Good teacher explains, a Superior teacher demonstrates but the great teacher inspires."

70. Children come from different backgrounds often being victimised by unwise and wrongly motived parental treatment. The teacher has to be more careful for he is enjoined with the duty of child development. This therefore is the background-in which the teachers role attains immense significance. It is for such reasons that the Union and the State appear to have come up with the necessity of a teacher eligibility test.

71. The importance of teaching and a teacher's selection should be to find out whether a candidate fulfils and is possessed of such attributes, that is capable of bringing out the best to ensure child development.

"The art of teaching is the art of assisting discovery (Mark Van Doran)". This Page 30 of 34 compulsory attribute is therefore to be assessed by the State while judging the capability of a teacher and which therefore is an essential qualification and not only a minimum qualification. The essential nature of this test therefore leaves no room for doubt that mere possession of educational qualification and a teachers training course is not sufficient to assess the capacity of a teacher.

72. Sir Winston Churchill while assessing the role of a teacher observed that the Head Masters of elementary schools have powers at their disposal with which even Prime Ministers have never been vested with. The reason is that the school master has to reckon not only with his pupils human tendency to run, but also with the unwisdom of parents in their early dealings with early tendency; elimination of wrong doing, not by plainly repressive methods is also one of the arts that has to be possessed by a skilful teacher.

73. All this goes to fulfil the objectives with which Article 45 of the Constitution of India was incorporated under the United Nations declaration which says that mankind owes to the child the best it has to give. An infant who does not know how to express himself, enters in an elementary school where he has to be taught his initial alphas and betas. The pronunciation, sentence-forming, elementary grammar and understanding of his first alphabets have to be installed in his mind with expertise. It is for this reason that the curriculum of the TET includes proficiency in the language of the medium of instruction, an optional language for a better understanding with the student, mathematics to assess the investigative strength of the mind and finally environmental studies to gauge the overall awareness of human life and nature. This has to be coupled with moral education and discipline and this entire combination in one performance is the skill of a teacher. He has to handle the weak and the nervous, the mediocre and intelligent, with an adequate measured skill for which a basic attribute with intelligence is required to be possessed by a teacher. A teacher cannot employ methods like knocking of a child because such Page 31 of 34 methods do not always turn a timid boy into a courageous one nor does it turn a spoilt brat into an angel. Nonetheless it is useful to remember Bishop Fulton J Sheen who said "Every child should have an occasional pat on the back, as long as it is applied low enough and hard enough". For teachers and guardians the proverb "Give a child enough rope, and you will trip" is also a cautionary note. The acquisition of such expertise is what is desired to be assessed and that is what the teacher eligibility test is designed for. It is only to assess these qualities that would qualify a teacher for being appointed as such and therefore the teacher eligibility test is not a mere eligibility criteria but a qualification as prescribed in addition to the academic and training qualifications.

74. It would be apt to quote Charles Dickens in his famous book "Hard Times" where the quality of a teacher has been expressed from another angle as follows:

"What I want is facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else."

75. The role of teaching is therefore of a mediator of learning, a parent substitute, a controller of students' behaviour, an agent of social change and finally a judge of achievement. The teacher who enters a school imparting elementary education has to act like a group leader who can remove the hindrances of doubts in the mind of an infant and generate creative development. Above all he has to in still in the mind of a youngster all virtues of courage and honesty as this part of education is a vital portion of child development. It is in the early years that the importance of education has to be preached so as to achieve what a former U.S. President Garfield said "Next in importance to freedom and justice is education without which the other two cannot be entertained."

24. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in V. Lavanya & others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Principal Secretary & others 5, has examined the power of the State Government to relax 5% 5 (2017) 1 SCC 322 Page 32 of 34 marks for reserved category candidates in the State Teacher Eligibility Test and has held that it is as per the policy of the NCTE. From the above-stated position of law, it is quite vivid that Hon'ble the Supreme Court has upheld the relaxation for TET only and not for appointment on the post of Teacher.

25. The judgment cited by the petitioners in Shiv Kumar Pathak (Supra) will not come in rescue for the petitioners as in the said judgment, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held at paragraph 17 as under:-

"17. There is no manner of doubt that the NCTE, acting as an 'academic authority' under Section 23 of the RTE Act, under the Notification dated 31st March, 2010 issued by the Central Government as well as under Sections 12 and 12A of the NCTE Act, was competent to issue Notifications dated 23 rd August, 2010 and 11th February, 2011. The State Government was under obligation to act as per the said notifications and not to give effect to any contrary rule. However, since NCTE itself has taken the stand that notification dated 11 th February, 2011 with regard to the weightage to be given to the marks obtained in TET is not mandatory which is also a possible interpretation, the view of the High Court in quashing the 15 th Amendment to the 1981 Rules has to be interfered with. Accordingly, while we uphold the view that qualifications prescribed by the NCTE are binding, requirement of weightage to TET marks is not a mandatory requirement."

26. Thus, the qualification prescribed by NCTE is binding and requirement of weightage to TET mark is not requirement for appointment. From bare perusal of Rules, 2019, it is quite vivid that the qualification prescribed in the Rules of 2019 are at par with the qualification prescribed by NCTE and even this judgment does not deal with the relaxation with minimum qualifying marks in the board examination or graduation which is essential qualification for appointment. The petitioners are trying the mix up the relaxation granted for TET with minimum percentage required under the rules. Both the things cannot be treated as one and the same as the recruitment rules governs Page 33 of 34 the field of recruitment which has been framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and is binding force. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in A.K. Bhatnagar & others Vs. Union of India & others6, has examined the effect of rules made under Article 309 of the Constitution of India that it has binding effect. Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held at paragraph 13 as under:-

"13. On more than one occasion this Court has indicated to the Union and the State Governments that once they frame rules, their action in respect of matters covered by rules should be regulated by the rules. The rules framed in exercise of powers conferred under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution are solemn rules having binding effect. Acting in a manner contrary to the rules does create problem and dislocation. Very often government themselves get trapped on account of their own mistakes or actions in excess of what is provided in the rules. We take serious view of these lapses and hope and trust that the government both at the Centre and in the States would take note of this position and refrain from acting in a manner not contemplated by their own rules. There shall be no order as to costs."

27. Even from bare perusal of the advertisement, the relaxation clause i.e. clause (v) of the advertisement, it is quite vivid that it does not provide any relaxation with regard to qualifying marks, therefore, it is crystal clear that unless a candidate secured minimum prescribed marks he or she is not eligible to be considered for appointment of Assistant Teacher/ Teacher. It is also not disputed that the person who is to be appointed teacher should have atleast the minimum qualifying marks in the examination prescribed so that the standard of education is not compromised and the State Government in its wisdom has framed the rule prescribing the qualifying minimum for appointment which is not subject to challenge before this Court, therefore, the writ petitions claiming benefit of relaxations deserve to be dismissed.

28. Before parting with this case, it would be pertinent to mention here that by restricting minimum qualifying marks to the tune of 6 (1991) 1 SCC 544 Page 34 of 34 50% without any relaxation, is with an object of appointing persons with good academic record as teacher, which cannot said to be arbitrary even in absence of any challenge or questioning validity of the rules, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to get any relaxation as reserved category candidates.

29. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are liable to be and are hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.

30. The interim order passed earlier by this Court, if any, stands vacated.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Arun