Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. And 3 Others vs Reena Singh And 74 Others on 27 May, 2020
Bench: Shashi Kant Gupta, Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?In Chamber Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 832 of 2019 Appellant :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Respondent :- Reena Singh And 74 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Archana Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh,Bharat Singh Pal,Birendra Kumar Gautam,D.M.Tripathi,Deo Prakash Singh,Digambar Dwivedi,Fuzail Ahmad Ansari,Kunwar Janmejay Pratam Singh,Saurabh Yadav,Surendra Mohan Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Siddharth Khare,Abhay Kumar Singh,Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Arvind Kumar Maurya,Hemlata Pandey,Jamwant Singh Yadav, Nagendra Kumar Tripathi,Prahlad Kumar Bhardwaj,Rajeev Kumar Saini,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava,Sanjay Srivastava,Sunil Kumar Srivastava,Taniya Pandey With Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 907 of 2019 Appellant :- Dharmendra Kumar And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Mahesh Prasad,Shobh Nath Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Both these special appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 3.4.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in Writ-A No.713 of 2019, (Reena Singh and 74 Ors Vs. State of U.P. & 3 Ors) and other connected matters, whereby the writ petitions were allowed in terms of the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge, Lucknow Bench of this Court in leading petition being Service Single No.1188 of 2019, (Mohd. Rizwan and Others Vs. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Basic Education Lko & Ors) along with other connected matters.
The writ petitions were filed challenging the Government Order dated 07.1.2019 issued by the Special Secretary Basic Education, Government of U.P. Lucknow fixing the minimum qualifying marks for Assistant Teacher Recruitment Examination, 2019 as 65 percent for General Category and 60 percent for Reserved Category.
The learned Single Judge Lucknow Bench held in para 181 that the Government Order dated 07.1.2019 is not sustainable in the eyes of law being arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as it makes an unreasonable classification by giving different treatment to two groups of identically situated persons appearing in two consecutive examinations and there is no valid reason and justification for drastically increasing minimum qualifying marks without having any nexus with the object sought to be achieved and accordingly a direction was passed to declare the result of Assistant Teacher Recruitment, 2019 in terms of the Government Order dated 01.12.2018 ignoring the Government Order dated 07.1.2019.
In the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has followed the abovementioned judgment passed by the learned Single Bench of the Lucknow Bench and disposed of/allowed the writ petitions accordingly.
This court has passed the following order on 18.7.2019:
"Delay Condonation Application No. 1 of 2019 There is delay of 73 days in filing the present appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay.
The appellant has explained the delay in paragraph nos. 6 and 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application.
Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection for condonation of delay.
We have perused paragraph nos. 6 and 7 of the affidavit and we are satisfied that the appellant has sufficiently explained the delay. We find that the sufficient cause has been shown by the learned counsel for the appellant.
The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly the delay condonation application is allowed.
Office to assign the regular number.
Order on Special Appeal Our attention has been drawn to Special Appeal No. 156 of 2019 wherein the coordinate Lucknow Bench of this Court has granted an interim order and directed the matter to be listed for disposal. The parties are agreed that the present special appeal arises out of the similar controversy involved in the above special appeal.
At the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, list this case on 19th August, 2019."
Counsel appearing in both the appeals were heard today through video conferencing as well as telephonically.
Mrs. Archana Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has pointed out that the Special Appeals filed before the Lucknow Bench of this Court have been disposed of vide order dated 06.5.2020, whereby the impugned order therein dated 29.3.2019 passed in writ Petition No.1188 (SS) of 2019 and other connected matters has been set-aside with the direction that the State of U.P. to declare the result of the examination which was held on 06.1.2019 in terms of the government order dated 07.1.2019 and accordingly prayed that the present special appeals may also be allowed in the same terms.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents and the impleaded parties have not able to dispute the submission made on behalf of the State.
We have perused the judgment dated 06.5.2020 passed by coordinate Lucknow Bench wherein it has been held in paragraphs 101,102, 103,104 and 105 as under:
"(101) The minimum qualifying marks which had been fixed vide Government Order dated 7.1.2019 were made uniformly applicable on all duly qualified candidates participating in the selection at hand, irrespective of whether such candidates possessed a BTC degree, B.Ed. degree or were Shiksha Mitras. The minimum qualifying marks were made uniformly applicable to all the examinees sitting for ATRE - 2019 and thus, we are of the view that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anand Kumar Yadav (supra) had never directed that Shiksha Mitras shall constitute one homogeneous clause for the purpose of recruitment nor it had caused any prejudice to the Shiksha Mitras because the same was applicable to all candidates who had participated in the ATRE - 2019 examination.
(102) The Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of India vs. Surender Singh and others (supra), while adjudicating a similar controversy pertaining to the fixation of minimum qualifying marks for selection of the most meritorious has been pleased to uphold as legal and valid the action of the competent authority for fixing the minimum qualifying marks which were fixed after examination was held, but prior to the declaration of the result, since the advertisement did not specify any qualifying marks for the examination in question, and the candidates had participated in the examination knowing fully well that no qualifying marks have been fixed in the advertisement and the same will be fixed prior to declaration of the result.
(103) The power of the Government to prescribe the qualifying marks of passing the examination even after the advertisement and the examination in exercise of power conferred under Rule 2 (x) of 1981 Rules is supported by the judgment of the Apex Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Surendra Singh and others (supra) and Jharkhand Pubic Service Commission vs. Manoj Kumar Gupta and others (supra). From the aforesaid, we are of the view that the decision of the Government for fixing of the minimum qualifying marks cannot be faulted.
(104) The examination conducted in 2019 for second ATRE-2019 does not discriminate between the Shiksha Mitras who appeared in 2018 and The Shiksha Mitras who appeared in 2018 and 2019 do not constitute one class for the purposes of passing the examinations of 2018 and 2019 as the standards of both the examinations was different and they have to pass the examination as per the advertisement and the Rules regulating both the examinations.
(105) For the reasons aforementioned, it cannot be said that the Government Order dated 7.1.2019 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India nor it makes an unreasonable classification or is nullifying the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Anand Kumar Yadav (supra). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order 29.3.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.1188 (SS) of 2019 and other connected matters filed by Shiksha Mitras and dismiss the said writ petitions by allowing all the Special Appeals and direct the State of U.P. to declare the result of examination which was held on 6.1.2019 in terms of the Government Order dated 7.1.2019 at the earliest as directed by the Apex Court in the case of Bhola Prasad Shukla v. Union of India and others (supra). All applications for intervention/ impleadment/civil miscellaneous applications are also disposed of in same terms. "
We, accordingly, set-aside the impugned judgment and order dated 3.4.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge and allow both the appeals in terms of the judgment and order passed by the co-ordinate Lucknow bench dated 06.5.2020 passed in Special Appeal No.156 of 2019 and other connected matters.
Order Date :- 27.5.2020-SB