Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. This court, by its ad-interim order dated 15th April, 2005, had directed as follows:

"Viewed from all these angles, therefore, the Respondents cannot consider persons who have not undergone two years basic Teachers Training Programme for appointment to the post of Assistant Teachers(Primary). The petitioners have prayed for a stay of the Examination scheduled to be held on 24.04.2005. The advertisement was published some months ago. It is directed that only those persons who have basic Teachers Training Programmes of two years duration would be eligible for appointment as Assistant Teachers(Primary). It follows that if the question paper is set in such a manner as is beyond the curriculum of a person who has undergone basic Teachers Training Programme of two years duration, the entire Examination may be vitiated. With these observations there is no necessity to interdict the coming Examinations."

6. The second batch of petitions, in Sanjeev's case, followed, close on the heels of the interim order dated 15-4-2005. The petitioners in these proceedings state that the advertisements permit B.Ed. as a qualification, and therefore, the interim order has the effect of foreclosing the entitlement of such candidates to participate in the recruitment process. The petitioners here allege that the respondent is bound by the terms of advertisement, and cannot take a contrary view, in refusing to select or appoint those possessing B.Ed or other notified qualifications.

22. The submission about the respondents being bound by terms of advertisement or alternatively, the terms of the recruitment rules, cannot be entertained. Firstly, a similar plea was put forward in Haq's case and negatived; that reasoning was upheld, by the Supreme Court. The decision of the Supreme Court constitutes law under Article 141 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are bound by the law so declared. Hence, the petitioners cannot claim estoppel, on the basis of the advertisement. Secondly, in Haq's case, the views of NCTE were noticed. Now, the Regulations under the 1993 Act have been formulated, and have come into force. They contain clear standards that have to be followed by all State and Central Government bodies, and recognized institutions. They mandate, inter alia, that Primary teachers must possess two years teachers' training diploma/ certificate. of the 1993 Act requires the NCTE to co-ordinate and lay down standards. Relevant portions of the said provision read as follows:

24. In view of the above position, recruitment to the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) of the B.Ed. candidates, and those who does not possess two years teachers training diploma/ certificate qualifications do not arise; the advertisement dated 06.01.2005 inviting B.Ed candidates, and others who do not possess two years teachers' training diploma/ certificate for recruitment of Assistant Teacher (Primary) is impermissible. The submission on behalf of the petitioners in Sanjeev's case about the candidates having prepared themselves, and applied for examination, in conformity with the advertisement, and thus having suffered some prejudice, is not entirely without merit. The legal position, on this aspect, was known to all; such as the MCD, the Board, and the Government of NCT. Indeed, MCD was a party to the proceedings in Haq's case and the Yogesh case. Yet, the impermissible qualifications were advertised. In the course of proceedings, MCD once again did a volte face; it denied that recruitment could be done on the basis of one years teacher training certificate. Likewise, the legal position is not different in the case of the Government of NCT; it however, persisted in asking candidates with B.Ed qualifications to apply; even during course of hearing this was sought to be justified, on the basis that such qualifications are needed after personnel are promoted to the middle school. That submission was expressly taken and rejected by the Supreme Court, in the decision in Yogesh Kumar case. Being law declared under Article 141 of the Constitution, that declaration is binding on all. Hence the action in including such qualifications, which are impermissible, in the advertisements, is arbitrary, and without application of mind. This has led to a colossal waste of effort, since several candidates applied with such qualifications; they also expended efforts to prepare themselves for the examination. The Board and other agencies also would have spent time, effort and money to process such applications; these could have been avoided, in the light of the directions of the Division Bench, the Supreme Court, and the 2001 Regulations. Certain directions are therefore called for on this issue.