Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Ashwani Kumar vs Govt. Of Nctd on 31 July, 2018
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
O.A. No.2822/2018
MA No. 3152/2018
Reserved On: 27.07.2018
Pronounced On:31.07.2018
HON'BLE MS. NITA CHOWDHURY, MEMBER (A)
HON'BLE MR. S.N. TERDAL, MEMBER (J)
1. Ashwani Kumar S/o Sh. Kailash Chand,
R/o B-131, Street No.7, Herdev Puri,
Shahdara, Delhi
2. Annu Panchal D/o Late Sh. Vinod Panchal,
R/o B-131, Street No.7, Herdev Puri,
Shahdara, Delhi - Applicants
(By Advocate: Shri U.Srivastava)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Through the Chief Secretary,
Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi.
2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board
Through its Chairman, Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
F-18, Karkardooma Institutional Area,
Delhi-92.
3. The Chairman,
Central Board of Secondary Education,
„Shiksha Kendra 2, Community Centre,
Preet Vihar, Delhi-92
4. The Commisioner, SDMC,
Dr. SPM Civic Centre,
Minto Road, JLN Marg, New Delhi .....Respondents
ORDER
By Ms. Nita Chowdhury, Member (A) MA No. 3152/2018 This MA has been filed by the applicants for joining together in a single application. For the reasons mentioned therein, MA is allowed.
2 OA 2822/2018O.A. No. 2822/2018
This Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicants seeking the following reliefs:-
"(a) Directing the respondents to place the relevant records pertaining to the present petition before their lordships for the proper adjudication in the matter.
(b) Quash and setting aside the impugned advertisement No.1/18 dt. 26.06.18 (Annexure A/1) notified by the respondents in supersession of the vacancy notice for the post code 16/17, Teacher (Primary) in MCD through the Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board for which the opening date & closing date of the application is 02.07.2018 and 30.07.2018 respectively for recruitment to the post of Teacher (Primary) Post Code: 1/18 under MCD to the extent of prescribing qualification on the premises that as per the recruitment rules the applicant is not passed the Central Teacher Eligibility Test conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education;
(c) Directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the applicant to participate in the examination against the advertisement No.01/18 dt. 26.06.18 notified by the respondents for recruitment to the Teacher (Primary) in MCD Post Code: 1/18 and the appointment may be subjected to clearing the Central Teacher Eligibility Test examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education within some stipulated.
(d) Allowing the OA of the applicants with all other consequential benefits and costs.
(e) Any other fit and proper relief may also be granted."
2. The facts, in brief, are that in this OA applicants are seeking direction to the respondent No.3-Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) that they are not conducting the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) in the later part of 2016, entire year of 2017 and half of 2018 which is one of the essential qualification for various teaching posts notified vide 3 OA 2822/2018 advertisement No.1/18. Their further dispute is to the impugned action on the part of the respondents in not relaxing the CTET qualification for appointment on the teaching posts as notified vide advertisement No.1/18 dated 26.06.2018 by the Director of Education, GNCTD for the post of applicants. They are aspirants to the post of Primary Teacher, Post Code 1/18, but are not able to apply online as they are not having CTET.
3. The applicants further submit that they are aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent No.1 to take up the matter with the Central Government for grant of relaxation in CTET qualification in terms of Section 23 (2) of the Rights of Children Free and Compulsory Education At, 2009 to the applicants for the post of Primary Teacher, post code 1/18, as advertised vide advertisement No.01/18. Since there has been no mechanism in place to conduct the CTET after September, 2016, the respondents ought to have considered and granted relaxation to the applicants to have qualified CTET on the closing date of applications viz. 30.07.2018 and the applicants are ready and willing to qualify in the next CTET, whenever the same is conducted.
4. The applicants also pleaded that CTET is being conducted twice every year, i.e., once in February and second in September but their plea is that after September, 2016 no CTET has been conducted and as such they have been deprived of their right to appear in the CTET examination and 4 OA 2822/2018 acquire the said qualification. Hence, they have prayed that they be given two chances to appear in the CTET after they had submitted their application form for the posts in terms of advertisement No.01/18.
5. They further pleaded that large number of vacancies for the post of Special Education Teacher and other teacher in the Directorate of Education have been lying vacant since 2011 (i.e. when the said posts were advertised) till date but could not be filled due to non-availability of suitable candidates. They have thus prayed that the OA be allowed and they be permitted to appear in the CTET examination.
6. Heard Shri U. Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the pleadings on record.
7. The short point involved in this case is that applicants who have not qualified CTET examination are seeking direction to be given to the respondents to hold the said examination so that they can apply for the posts of teacher. We may mention, that it is the prerogative of the Government/State Government when to hold a particular test but Courts cannot give any direction in this regard. No doubt, if they have applied for a particular post cost 1/18 for MCD and are not CTET qualified, how can their forms be accepted. By way of this OA, the applicants are seeking automatic exemption to hold CTET examination which is not within our domain and it is for the Government to see when to conduct a particular exam. 5 OA 2822/2018
8. The details of the qualifications of the applicants are as under:-
Name of Qualificatio
Applicants ns
1. Ashwani Oct., 2013 (10+2)
Kumar
26.08.2016
Diploma in
Education (Special
Education)
2. Annu 2014 (10+ 2)
Panchal
Dec. 2016
(Diploma in
Elementary
Education)
9. Hence the averments, with regard to the fact that the requisite qualifications are not found to be correct. From the above, it is clear that the applicants only acquired the basic qualification for applying for CTET only in the year 2016. Hence, the respondents cannot be called into question for delaying of holding of CTET examination.
10. The applicants have also submitted since CTET was not regularly held after 2010 hence directions be issued to hold the same test. In this regard, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Ram Saran, AIR 1964 SC 1361, while interpreting the provisions of Section 2 of the Act, 1861, held that State Government alone is empowered to frame Rules regulating the condition of service of members of the police force. Thus the decision rendered in Ram Saran's case (supra) is fully 6 OA 2822/2018 applicable to the applicants case and they cannot be granted any interim relief.
11. In the circumstances giving a blanket permission to everybody who wants to participate in a selection without considering the individual facts of each case, would not be in accordance with law. Thus seen from any angle, the interim relief, as prayed for by the applicants, in this OA is not allowed.
12. Issue notice to the respondents to file their reply within 2 weeks and thereafter 2 weeks to the applicants to file rejoinder. List the matter before the Principal Registrar‟s court for completion of pleadings on 31.08.2018.
(S.N. Terdal) (Nita Chowdhury) Member (J) Member (J) /lg/