Punjab-Haryana High Court
Punam Devi vs State Of Haryana & Others on 9 May, 2013
Author: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
Bench: Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
CWP No. 10024 of 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 10024 of 2013.
Date of Decision : 09.05.2013.
Punam Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Others ...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Mr. S.K. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral)
The petitioner had applied for the post of Primary Teacher in pursuance to advertisement dated 08.11.2012 (Annexure P-5) issued by the Haryana School Teachers Selection Board. It has been asserted that the petitioner possessed the essential qualifications prescribed for the post and also possessed four years teaching experience as Primary Teacher as on the crucial date i.e. 11.04.2012 to claim exemption from qualifying the HTET/STET Examination.
The present writ petition has been filed raising a grievance that even though no specific order of rejection has been passed but yet the respondent-Board has not accepted her candidature on the ground that she does not possess four years teaching experience as Primary Teacher after having acquired the essential qualifications.
CWP No. 10024 of 20132
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has not disputed that the essential qualifications stipulated for the post of Primary Teacher was two years diploma in elementary education. It has further been admitted that the petitioner qualified such diploma in elementary education only on 13.01.2010. The relevant stipulation as regards one time exemption being granted to candidates as regards qualifying HTET/STET Examination is contained in note-3 of the advertisement which reads in the following terms :
"A one time exemption of HTET/STET for teachers who till 11.04.2012 have worked for minimum 4 years in privately managed Govt. Aided Schools, Recognized Schools and Govt. Schools. Number of years is cumulative, candidate must be in service as PRT on 11.4.2012 and in position on the date of applying. The teaching experience must be as Primary Teacher after acquiring essential qualification and supported by salary slip. They will have to qualify HTET not later than Ist, April 2015 otherwise their services will be terminated automatically."
Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that even though the clear stipulation in Note-3 was to the effect that the teaching experience must be as a primary teacher after acquiring essential qualification but would draw support from Note-5 of the advertisement which reads in the following terms :
CWP No. 10024 of 20133
"Candidates possessing higher academic or professional qualification will not be eligible unless they possesses the minimum qualification including HTET or four years teaching experience as primary teacher."
The argument raised by the learned counsel is that under Note- 5, the petitioner on account of possessing higher qualifications than the essential qualifications prescribed, the four years teaching experience that was required for claiming exemption from HTET/STET has to be as a primary teacher and it is not necessary for such experience to be reckoned after possessing the essential qualification of diploma in elementary education. In a nutshell, the argument raised insofar as the petitioner is concerned is that it would only be Note-5 that would hold the field. Still further reliance has been placed upon a Division Bench judgment passed by this Court in Mahesh Kumar and another Vs. State of Punjab and others, 2009(1) RSJ 431 to contend that the experience acquired by a candidate even prior to the qualification prescribed for a post cannot be ignored.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has been heard at length and the pleadings on record have been perused.
In the light of above mentioned facts, in my considered view, there is no infirmity in the action of the respondent-Board in holding the petitioner is ineligible for the post of Primary Teacher. The petitioner admittedly acquired essential qualifications i.e. diploma in elementary education only on 13.01.2010. The clear stipulation contained in Note-3 CWP No. 10024 of 2013 4 was to the effect that "the teaching experience of four years must be as a primary teacher after acquiring essential qualification to claim exemption from HTET/STET." Note-5 relates to a candidates who possessed higher qualifications and covers such eventuality whereby candidates possessing a better or higher qualification than the minimum prescribed would not to be held ineligible unless, they possess the minimum qualification including HTET or four years teaching experience as primary teachers. The expression four years teaching experience as contained in Note-5 will have to be necessarily read along with Note-3 contained in the advertisement. The requirement of possessing the teaching experience after acquiring the essential qualification cannot be diluted in any way in terms of referring to Note-5. The petitioner having acquired the essential qualification only on 13.01.2010 could not possibly possess the four years teaching experience as on 11.4.2012.
That apart, the reliance placed upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, upon the Division Bench Judgment in Mahesh Kumar (supra), is also wholly mis-placed. In that case, the petitioners therein had applied for the post of Head Masters and the basic qualifications/conditions of eligibility stipulated were M.A. or M.Sc. with B.T/B.Ed.-seven years. In the light of such eligibility conditions, it had been held that there was no requirement of having possessed the requisite seven years experience prior to the essential qualification. The essential qualifications and the experience were treated to be conjunctive in nature. The facts of that case are clearly distinguishable on account of the fact that the advertisement CWP No. 10024 of 2013 5 dated 08.11.2012 issued by the respondent-Board in the present case contained a stipulation which was unambiguous and in clear terms i.e. to have possessed the teaching experience only after acquiring the essential qualification.
The petitioner having applied for the post of Primary Teacher in the light of advertisement dated 08.11.2012 would be clearly bound by the terms & conditions and the stipulation contained therein.
For the reasons recorded above, I find no merit in this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
May 09, 2013. (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) kanchan JUDGE