Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Similarly, vide Government Order dated 15.12.2016 the State Government has taken a decision for the recruitment on 4000 posts of Assistant Teachers (Urdu Language) out of 16460 posts of Assistant Teachers in Basic Schools run by the Board. The said Government Order was followed by a circular dated 28.12.2016 issued by the Secretary of the Board. In the said circular a specific schedule was mentioned for completing the aforesaid process of selection. On 26.12.2016 the guidelines were also issued by the Secretary of the Board giving detailed directions to be followed in finalizing the said selection. A copy of the said circular is on the record. A perusal of the guidelines dated 16.12.2016 indicates that the entire selection is based upon quality point marks awarded on the academic qualification possessed by the individual candidate.

A rejoinder affidavit has been filed to the Short Counter Affidavit of the Secretary of the Board.

I have heard Sri Seemant Singh, Ashwani Kumar Yadav, Sri Mithilesh Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel and Sri A.K. Yadav & Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the Board.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have applied in pursuance of the Government Order dated 11.7.2013. They were called for counselling and they have secured more marks than the cut-off marks in their respective districts where they had applied. The second respondent on 30.12.2016 had issued a direction to all the District Basic Education Officers to complete the recruitment process against the vacant posts. Initially due to the Model Code of Conduct enforced by the Election Commission the selection was stopped but on 23.5.2017 the second respondent issued directions for completing the process of recruitment as the ban was lifted.

He further submitted that the impugned order dated 23.3.2017 has been passed only on the ground that after the Legislative Assembly Elections, there is change of Government and on the oral instructions of the State Government, the entire process of recruitment has been abruptly stopped. It is stated that the said decision is arbitrary and illegal. He has further submitted that the Director, SCERT in the order dated 13.1.2017, which he has passed in compliance of the order of this Court, has mentioned that the Secretary has already issued directions to the District Basic Education Officers for completing the process of selection hence no further order is required to be passed.

Regard being had to the fact that the decision of the Supreme Court was prior to the amendment in the Constitution inserting Article 21-A and the enactment of the Act, 2009. Now after the said amendment it is not open to the State Government to take plea of lack of funds in respect of appointments or providing infrastructure to the Basic Schools conducted by the Board. The Constitution casts an obligation on the State Government to provide quality education in the Basic Schools.

For the reasons mentioned above, I find that the oral instructions issued by the State Government for stopping the recruitment process is not justifiable. Accordingly, the order of the Secretary dated 23.3.2017, which is bereft of any reason, is set aside. The Secretary of the Board is directed to complete the process of selection against the remaining vacant posts strictly in terms of earlier respective circulars dated 16.6.2016, 19.9.2016 15.12.2016 and 30.12.2016, expeditiously, preferably within two months from the date of communication of this order.