Mukesh Joshi & Four Others vs State Of Uttarakhand & Three Ors on 18 January, 2013

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Mukesh Joshi & Four Others vs State Of Uttarakhand & Three Ors on 18 January, 2013

Bench: B.S.Verma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

             Urgency Application No.232 of 2013
          Interim Relief Application No.446 of 2013
                              In
              Writ Petition No.71 of 2013 (S/S)

Mukesh Joshi & four others
                                              ... Petitioners
                           Vs.
State of Uttarakhand & three Ors.
                                            ...Respondents

Hon'ble B.S.Verma, J. (Oral)

Urgency Application No.232 of 2013 is allowed. Heard Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos.1 and 2, Mr. N.S. Negi, Advocate for respondent no.3 and Mr. Vivek Pathak, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Advocate for respondent no.4.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned condition of securing 45% marks in graduation for appearing in TET, imposed as per Clause 2 (a) of the Notification dated 23.8.2010 for UTET-II and clause III

(i)(a) of substituted Notification dated 29.07.2011 for UTET-I in respect of the petitioners and declaring that the same as void and against the guideline of NCTE.

A writ of mandamus has also been sought directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear in the Teachers Eligibility Test UTET-I and UTET-II schedule in pursuance of Notification dated 26.12.2012.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition No.772 (S/S) of 2011, [2011 (2) U.D. 575], in paragraph 54, has held:-

"...a restriction of having minimum percentage in graduation is both unreasonable, unjust and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, this Court declares such condition of asking a minimum percentage of marks in graduation from those candidates who are B.Ed. qualified in NCTE notification dated 23.8.2010 and subsequent State Government Order dated 29.4.2011 as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Further this Court directs the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear in TET examination treating them to be qualified under Clause 3 of the notification dated 23.8.2010 and State Government Order dated 29.4.2011..."

In reply thereto, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4 has submitted that against the said judgment of this Court, a special appeal is pending before the Division Bench of this High Court, although there is no interim order as on today in that appeal.

In view of the above judgment of this Court, the Court directs the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear provisionally in the UTET-I and UTET-II examination.

The respondents are allowed four weeks' time to file counter affidavit.

Thereafter, two weeks' time is allowed to the petitioners to file rejoinder affidavit.

List after winter vacation.

Interim relief application is disposed of.

(B.S.Verma,J.) Vacation Judge 18.01.2013 Rajni

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Uttarakhand High Court