Jharkhand High Court
Reema Shill vs The State Of Jharkhand Through ... on 9 May, 2024
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 749 of 2022
---
Reema Shill ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
2. The Director, Primary Education, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Pakur
4. The District Superintendent of Education, Pakur .... ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Suman Marandi, A.C. to S.C.-IV Order No. 06 Dated: 09.05.2024 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo no. 1020 dated 22.12.2021 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) issued by the Director, Directorate of Primary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand (the respondent no. 2) whereby the petitioner's claim for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Class I to V) in primary school in Pakur district has been rejected on the ground that she does not possess the requisite qualification of passing the Intermediate or equivalent exam with minimum 50% marks.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record.
3. The petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 3513 of 2017 seeking appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher (Class I to V) in primary school in Pakur district. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 1 21.01.2021 with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2 annexing all the credentials including the marksheet annexed with the said writ petition and the said respondent, in turn, was directed to consider the petitioner's case in the light of the submission of learned counsel for the State within a time frame. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a fresh representation which was disposed of by the respondent no. 2 vide impugned order as contained in memo no. 1020 dated 22.12.2021 rejecting the petitioner's claim for appointment as Assistant Teacher (Class - I to V) in primary school on the ground that she did not have requisite qualification of passing the Intermediate exam with minimum 50% marks.
4. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner had done the course of 'Bachelor of Preparatory Programme (BPP)' offered by IGNOU and minimum duration of the said course was six months whereas maximum duration was two years. Hence, the petitioner had requisite qualification to be appointed as Assistant Teacher in primary school, however the same was unlawfully denied by the respondents.
5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 stating inter alia that the respondent no. 2 has clearly mentioned in the impugned order dated 22.12.2021 that as per rule 4 (ख) (i) (अ) of the Jharkhand Elementary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2012 (as amended) (in short, "the Rules, 2012"), a candidate should have passed higher secondary 2 or equivalent examination with minimum 50% marks as well as must possess two years diploma in elementary education for appointment as Assistant Teacher (Class- I to V). Since the petitioner has done the said BPP course of six months duration and does not possess the degree of Intermediate or equivalent, her claim for being appointed as Assistant Teacher (Class- I to V) in primary school has been rejected in terms with the Rules, 2012.
6. I find substance in the said stand taken in the counter affidavit. Admittedly, the petitioner has done six months' BPP course from IGNOU which cannot be said to be a course equivalent to intermediate/higher secondary. Thus, I find no infirmity in the impugned order dated 22.12.2021 passed by the respondent no. 2.
7. The writ petition being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.
Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.)
3