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 0, Cited by 7]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Anamika Gupta vs State Of Haryana And Others on 11 December, 2012

Bench: A.K.Sikri, Rakesh Kumar Jain

CWP No.18569 of 2012                                                 [1]
                                   *****

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH


                                          CWP No.18569 of 2012
                                          Date of decision:11.12.2012

Anamika Gupta                                                   ...Petitioner
                                    Vs.
State of Haryana and others                                  ...Respondents


CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K.Sikri, Chief Justice
       Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain


Present:     Mr. Suresh Ahlawat, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. B.S.Rana, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
                   *****

A.K.Sikri, CJ. (Oral)

The petitioner has applied for the post of PGT which have been notified for selection by the respondents by issuing advertisement on 07.0.2012. Selection to these posts is governed by the Haryana State Education School Cadre (Group B) Service Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules") which were notified on 11.04.2012. These Rules stipulate that the basic qualification prescribed for the post in question is Matric with Hindi/Sanskrit or 10+2/B.A./M.A. with Hindi as one of the subjects. The passing of STET is also prescribed as an essential qualification. However, the Rules, which were amended subsequently as well, give one time relaxation to those who have experience of 4 years as Guest Faculty Teacher in the State of Haryana or in Government School or CWP No.18569 of 2012 [2] ***** Schools recognized by the Government. This 4 years' experience requires as PGT.

The petitioner does not have the experience of 4 years as PGT instead she possesses the experience as TGT. She, thus, submits that her experience as TGT be included to fulfill the aforesaid eligibility condition of 4 years as well.

We are afraid that such a contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted. There is a definite purpose for prescribing 4 years' experience of teaching the students in PGT which, for the posts now advertised, is the only material consideration.

We, therefore, do not find any merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed.


                                                        (A.K.Sikri)
                                                       Chief Justice


11.12.2012                                         (Rakesh Kumar Jain)
vinod*                                                    Judge