Saturday, November 7, 2015

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - - केंद्रीय न्यायिक प्राधिकरण (केट) -> अगर टेट पास अभ्यर्थी पर्याप्त संख्या में उपलब्ध नहीं , तो टेट में छूट संभव

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - -
केंद्रीय न्यायिक प्राधिकरण (केट) -> अगर टेट पास अभ्यर्थी पर्याप्त संख्या में उपलब्ध नहीं , तो टेट में छूट संभव
If TET Pass Candidates are not available in sufficient number then minimum qualification (TET) can be relaxed.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL (CAT) , NCTE, Supreme Court of India, RTE,

हालाँकि केट एक अर्ध न्यायिक अदालत होती है और केंद्र सरकार के कर्मचारियों के प्रशासनिक मामलों को त्वरित रूप से निपटाने के लिए बनाई गई है ।
इसके जज क़्वासी जुडिशियल बॉडी यानि अर्ध सरकारी जज कहलाते हैं और इसीलिये फैसला देने वाले अपने आप को जज की जगह मेंबर लिखते हैं
इनके फैसलों को ऊपरी अदालत अर्थात हाई कोर्ट में चुनौती दी जा सकती है , आज से कुछ साल पहले जब यह केस सामने आया था तो बड़े बड़े न्यूज़ पेपर ने
खबर बेचने के लिये लिखा था की - केंद्रीय न्यायिक प्राधिकरण ने टेट से छूट दे दी

जबकि ये ट्राइब्यूनल / प्राधिकरण वास्तव में पूरी कोर्ट भी नहीं कहलाते , और कई बार हाई कोर्ट ने ही केट (केंद्रीय न्यायिक प्राधिकरण) को इसके कुछ निर्णय पर फटकार लगाई है ,हाई कोर्ट तो केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग को भी कई फटकार लगा चुका है और इस आयोग को दण्डित भी कर चुका है ।
केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग भी अर्ध न्यायिक ट्राइब्यूनल है और हाई कोर्ट से नीचे आती है

वास्तव में केंद्रीय न्यायिक प्राधिकरण का ऑर्डर था ->अगर टेट पास अभ्यर्थी पर्याप्त संख्या में उपलब्ध नहीं , तो टेट में छूट संभव

ऑर्डर देखिए ->>

fresh qualification made essential for the post i.e. CTET, only about 146 candidates were found to be eligible to work as Resource Teacher on contract basis.

Court Ordered ->>>
direction to the respondents to assess the requirement of Resource Teachers in the project in question and if it is found that sufficient eligible teachers are not available to discharge the function as Resource Teacher in the project on contract basis, they would take up the matter to relax the condition of minimum qualification in terms of Section 23 (2)

CENTRAL ADMINSITRATIVE TRIBUNAL (CAT) Judgement/ Order of Court ->>>

PRINCIPAL BENCH

NEW DELHI

OA 3104/2013

MA 2532/2013

MA 2369/2013

this the 9th day of July, 2014

Hon ble Mr. A.K.Bhardwaj, Member (J)

Hon ble Dr..Birendra Kumar Sinha, Member (A)

1. Shri Ratnesh Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Surender Nath Singh, Aged 33 years, R/o Block A, 421, Minto Road Complex, New Delhi 110 002 (File No.36 MR)

2 Shri Desh Raj Patel S/o Shri Ram Raj Patel, aged 33 years, R/o A 421, Minto Road Complex New Delhi 110 002 (File No. 21 HI)

3. Shri Shravan Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Vindhyachal Yadav, aged 31 years, R/o D-Block 816, Jahangirpuri, Delhi-33 (File No.19 HI)

4 Shri Atif Ali S/o Shri Majid Ali, aged 31 years, R/o Block-R, 68 G.Dilshad Garden, Delhi -95 (File No.259 MR)

5. Shri Ram Gopal S/o Shri Radhey Shyam, aged 35 years, R/o K 35/5, Near DESU Transformer Rubber Factory Road, West Ghonda, Delhi-93 (File No.46 MR)

6. Shri Nityanend S/o Shri Gore Lal Singh, aged 32 years R/o H.No.1791, South Extension, Part I Kotla Mubarkpur, Prasadi Gali, Delhi 110 003 (File No.99 BI)

7. Ms. Sulakshana Yadav D/o Shri Veer Singh, aged 31 years R/o RZ 148/74, Gali No.10, Sagar Pur East, New Delhi 110 046 (File No.43 MH)

8. Shri Jayram Singh Yadav S/o Shri Prahaled Singh Yadav, aged 35 years R/o Village Chaubatue, Post Zahurabed Distt. Ghazipur (UP) (File No.285 MR)

9. Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh S/o Shri Ram Dhani Singh, Aged 35 years R/o Village Fahtepur Post Baragoar Distt. Varanasi (UP) (File No.182 HI)

10. Shri Surendra Kumar S/o Shri Ram Lakhan, Aged 33 years R/o VPO Barahi Newada, Varanasi (UP) (File No.190 HI)

11. Shri Kalendra Bharti S/o Shri Ram, aged 34 years R/o D Block 817, Jahangirpuri, Delhi- 110 033 (File No. 24 HI)

12. Shri Surender Yadav S/o Shri Dinesh Chander Yadav, aged 31 years R/o VPO Nawanagar Distt. Ballia (UP)-221717 (File No.60 HI)

13. Shri Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Hari Lal, aged 34 years R/o Plot 53, Shivpuri Colony, Hazari Chhawni Bhiti Varanasi (UP) 221008 (File No.117 VI)

14. Shri Vinod Kumar Verma S/o Shri Hari Lal Verma, aged 32 years R/o VPO, Harsos, Distt. Varanasi (File No.106 VI)

15. Ms.Reetu D/o Raman Singh, aged 25 years R/o 3/116, Parbhu Nagar Opp. Suri Petrol Pump Old Rohtak Road, Sonipat, Haryana 131 001 (File No.42 MR)

16. Ms. Indresh Varma D/o Shri Om Prakash Varma, aged 42 years R/o E-275, Eldeco Colony Rai Bareily Road Lucknow (UP)-226025 (File No.189 HI)

17. Shri Navin Gour S/o Shri Umesh Kumar, aged 33 years R/o H No.195, F/10, Hanuman Mandir Gali, Near BDO Office, K.D.Nagar Gannaur, Sonepat, Haryana 131101 (File No.186 HI)

18. Shri Mukesh Kumar Dhania S/o Shri Man Singh, aged 33 years R/o PO-Kohar, Teh-Behror Distt.-Alwar, Rajasthan- 301 709 (File No.110 VI)

19. Shri Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Ram Charan Meena, aged 33 years R/o Post-Raghopura, The-Bamanwas Distt Sawai Madnopur Raj-322211 (File No.128 VI)

20. Ms. Soni Singh D/o Shri Suranjay Singh, aged 29 years R/o Village Hariharpur Chhwani Post - Hariharpur, Distt.-Jaunpur (UP) (File No.169 HI)

21. Shri Rajender Prasad Suredia S/o Shri Jagdeesh Prasad Suredia, aged about 36 years R/o Village Jatganwara PO Jakhrana, Reh-Behror Distt.-Alwar, Raj 301713 (File No.HI 284 MR)

22. Shri Munna Lal Chauhan S/o Shri Cheedi Chauhan, aged 31 years R/o VPO, Patoi, Distt. Ballia (UP) 221716 (File No.HI 153)

23. Shri Tejpal Singh S/o Shri Mukat Singh, aged 32 years R/o Village Nagla Dadra, Post Parsera Distt. Aligarh (UP) 202137 (File No.39 MR)

24. Shri Dharmender Kumar S/o Mauji Lal, aged 27 years R/o 34/1 Block-34, Trilokpuri, Delhi 110 092 (File No.248 MR)

25. Ms. Monika D/o Shri Prakash Chand, aged 27 years R/o 46, Savitri Nagar, Malviya Nagar New Delhi 110 017 (File No.219 MR)

26. Ms. Anju Tiwari D/o Ashok Kumar, aged 31 years R/o Flat No.5, Top Florr, Bharamjeet Chowk Near Talab Chowk, Mandwali Delhi 110 092 (File No.VI 58)

27.. Ms. Meeta Das D/o Shri Madhu Das, aged 25 years R/o A-25, Kasturba Niketan Complex Lajpat Nagar-II, New Delhi 110 024 (File No.305 MR)

28. Ms. Suman D/o K.L.Sharma, aged 26 years R/o RZ A1, Pratap Garden Near Bindapur Ext., New Delhi 110 059 (File No.205 MR)

29. Ms. Shashi Katiyal W/o Pawan Katiyal, aged 35 years R/o H.No.291, Sector-55, Faridabad (File No.258 MR)

30. Shri Amarjeet S/o Shri Chandramma, aged 31 years R/o Village Sikrour, Post Office, Luduhi Distt.-Mau (UP) (File No.121 VI)

31. Shri Sandhya Sah D/o Shri H.P.Sah, aged 38 years R/o B1/D, 1st Floor, Jitar Nagar Delhi 110 051 (File No.29 CP)

32. Ms. Neeta Kumari Basu D/o Basudev, aged 42 years R/o H.No.1310, Gali No.13 Govind Puri, Kalkaji, New Delhi (File No.46 MR)

33. Ms. Manisha Pandey D/o Shri Ashish Kumar, 34 years R/o A-32, Ground Floor, Guru Ram Das Nagar Laxmi Nagar, Delhi 110 092 (File No.293 MR)

34. Ms. Rekha D/o Bhori Lal, aged 34 years R/o F 305, Budh Nagar Inderpuri, New Delhi 110 012 (File No.48-MR)

35. Ms. Asha Kumari W/o Shri Virendera Kumar, aged 32 years R/o 196, Masid, South Extension Part-II New Delhi 110 049 (File No.297 MR)

36. Shri Girish Kumar S/o Shri Ram Gopal, aged 37 years R/o Plot No.E-63, Ram Nagar Extension, Sodala Jaipur, Rajasthan 302019 (File No.296 MR)

37. Shri Balram Meena S/o Bheru Lal Meena, aged 33 years R/o VPO Bicchidiona Tehsil Malarnadunger Distt. Swami Madhopur, Rajasthan 322 033 (File No.304 MR)

38. Ms Madhu Bala Kumari D/o Shri Tun Tun Prasad, aged 27 years R/o EP 7 139, Sarojini Nagar, Delhi 23 (File No.32 MR)

39. Shri Deep Chandra Tiwari S/o Shri Vimal Tiwari, aged 32 years R/o House no.60, Extension-3, Nangloi Delhi -110 041 (File No.174 HI)

40 Shri Saurabh Tiwari S/o Vimal Chandra Tiwari, aged 29 years R/o House No.60, Extension-3, Nangloi Delhi 110 041 (File No.97 VI)

41. Ms.Anju Kumari D/o Shri Sambhu Lal, aged 26 years R/o H.No.11A 2nd floor, Amritpuri, East of Kailash, New Delhi 110 065 (File No.253 MR)

42. Ms.Anamika Verma D/o Shri Kamlesh Kumar Verma, aged 25 years R/o H.No.1089, Gali No.10, Govind Puri Kalkaji, New Delhi 19 (File No.187 HI)

43. Shri Ashish Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Kamala Prasad Yadav, aged R/o Village Anand Nagar Patulakhi PO Karchana, Distt-Allahabad (UP) 212307 (File No.59 HI)

44. Shri Bisheshwar Kumar S/o Shri Hira Ram, aged 33 years R/o Village Rasoolpur Taluka Kasim Khan, Post Ghosi, Distt Mau (UP) (File No.120 VI)

45. Shri Reena Shakya W/o Shri Abdesh Kumar, aged 30 years R/o 34/1, 2nd floor, Trilok Puri Delhi -91 (File No.211 MR)

46. Shri Sandeep Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Ganga Saran Pandey, aged 31 years R/o 33/376, Trilok Puri, Delhi 91 (File No.136 HI)

47. Ms. Sandhya D/o Shri Gobind Saran Mishra, aged 32 years R/o Flat No.10, C8, Gali No.9, Hindan Vihar Barola, Noida-Sector 49, Uttar Pradesh (File No. 270 MR)

48. Ms. Pushpa Rawat D/o Shri B.S.Rawat, aged 34 years R/o 524 B-2, Ext.II, B-Block Shalimar Garden, Sahibabad, Ghazibad, UP (File No.266 MR)

49. Ms. Seema D/o Shri Balwant Singh Dafauli, aged 32 years R/o A-19, Gali No.13, Ambedkar Place Baprola Vihar, New Delhi 43 (File No.246 MR)

50. Ms. Krishna Baluni W/o Shri Naresh Baluni, aged 36 years R/o House No.149, Sector 12, Noida, UP (File No.MR)]

51. Shri Navneet Kumar Dwivedi S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Dwivedi, aged 35 years R/o 162, Sagar Kunj, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar PO & Distt. Farukkhabad UP -209625 (File No.254 MR)

52 Shri Shradha Mishra D/o Shri Nawal Kishore Mishra, aged 34 years R/o -4/20, Kiran Bazar, PO & Distt. Farukhabad UP 209625 (File No.62 VI)

53. Shri Subhash Chand Nagar S/o Shri Om Parkash, aged 33 years R/o 1/45, Rakshapuram Mawana Road, Meerut, UP -2500104 (File No.290 MR)

54. Shri Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Shaker, aged 25 years R/o Village-Ganjeri PO-Sohganli, Distt. Sultanpur UP-228155 (File No.175 HI)

55. Shri Panna Lal S/o Shri Banvasi Lal, aged 30 years R/o Village Kodhaniya, Post Bharari Meja Road, Allahabad UP 212302 (File No.23 HI)

56. Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Rama Kant Sharma, aged 29 years R/o Village Tundihar, Post Bharari Meja Road, Distt.-Allahabad (UP) (File No.07 VI)

57. Shri Rajesh Kumar S/o Shri Bhart Ram, aged 32 years R/o D Block, Natiz Road, Batla House Okhla, Delhi 110 025 (File No.18 HI)

58. Ms.Sarika Sawaria W/o Shri Naresh Kumar, aged 34 years R/o C 74, LIG Flats, Ashok Vihar, Phase-IV Delhi 52 (File No.226 MR)

59. Ms. Anuradha W/o Gaje Singh, aged 40 years R/o H.No.10, VPO Mukhmel Pur, Delhi 110 036 (File No.225 MR)

60. Ms. Sushma Singh Rawat W/o Shri Sanjiv Singh Rawat, aged 37 years R/o H.No.710, Sector II, Vasundhra Ghaziabad, UP (File No.238 MR)

61. Ms. Kusum Pant W/o Shri Manoj Pant, aged 33 years R/o C-36 A Hardev Nagar, Jharoda, Burari Delhi -85 (File No.240 MR)

62. Ms. Neelam Agarwal W/o Late Narender Kumar, aged 36 years R/o H.No.63, Laxmi Vihar, Burari, Delhi-84 (File No.HI 141)

63. Ms. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Fattan Singh, aged 38 years R/o D-100, Avantika Sector-1, Rohini New Delhi 84 (File No.HI-17)

64. Ms. Sushma Tiwari W/o Shri K.K.Tiwari, aged 39 years R/o D-100, Avantika Sector-1, Rohini New Delhi -84 (File No. HI-17)

65. Ms. Aradhana Singh W/o Ms. Ritu Raj Singh, aged 29 years R/o M-96, Ram Krishna Apartments Plot No.29, I.P.Extension Patparganj, Delhi 110 092 (File No.HI-13)

66. Ms. Rakhi Gupta W/o Dr. Rakesh Kumar, aged 40 years R/o J-4/19A, Khirkhi Extension Malviya Nagar, New Delhi 110 017 (File No.MR 53)

67. Mr. Usha W/o Shri Rajesh Kumar, aged 35 years R/o J-3/92, DDA Flats Kalkaji, New Delhi 110 019 (File No.MR 53)

68. Ms. Asha Rani W/o Shri Hem Chand, aged 39 years R/o H.No.153, Johripur Main Road, Delhi 94 (MR 220)

69. Ms. Manju Bala W/o Late Gopal Dass Ahuja, aged 42 years R/o 7/385 A, Jawala Nagar, Main Road Shahadara Opposite MCD School, Delhi 110 032 (File No.236 MR)

70. Ms. Parul D/o Shri Rana Pratap Singh, aged 42 years R/o C-86, Jhilmil Colony, Delhi 110 095 (File No.243 MR)

71. Ms. Shalini Jain W/o Shri Saurabh Kumar Jain, aged 33 years R/o 11/344, DDA Flats, East of Kailash, New Delhi 110 065 (File No.HI-165)

72. Ms. Bhawna Sharma W/o Sudhakar Sharma, aged 33 years R/o D22/8, Street No.2, Madhuban Maujpur Delhi-53 (File No.16-HI)

73. Ms. Savita W/o Shri Rajeev Kumar R/o H.No.611. Dr. Ambedkar Basti Ghonda, Delhi 110 053

74. Ms. Pratiksha Pandey D/o Shri U.N.Pandey R/o Kartikay Apartment MS 1-61 Vrindavan Garden, Sahibabad Ghaziabad, UP.

75. Ms. Swapna Pandey D/o Shri U.N.Pandey R/o O Kartikay Apartment MS 1-61 Vrindavan Garden, Sahibabad Ghaziabad, UP

76. Ms. Tripti Singh D/o Shri Raguender Prasad Singh W/o 514, Patrakar Parishad, Sector-5 Vasundhara Ghaziabad, UP 201012

77. Ms. Sneha D/o Shri Neetan Vig, R/o IInd Floor Subash Nagar, Delhi-27

78. Ms. Amarjeet Kaur W/o Shri Jitender Singh R/o RZ/B-128, Vishnu Garden (Nursing Garden) Delhi -18

79. Ms. Anju Sain W/o Shri Mukesh Sain R/o A5A/250, Janakpuri New Delhi -58

80. Ms. Sudesh Devi W/o Shri Suresh Kumar R/o K-13, Old Govind Park Ext. Street No.6, Delhi -51

81. Shri Vijay Pratap Singh S/o Shri Shobha Nath Singh R/o Village Birapatti, Distt. Varanasi 221105 (UP)

82. Ms. Arushi Tyagi W/o Shri Vineet Tyagi R/ H.No.119, Phase-III Vikas Nagar, Hastsal, Uttam Nagar New Delhi 59

Applicants (By Advocate: Shri Ashok Aggarwal)

Versus

1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi Through its Chief Secretary Delhi Secretariat I.P.Estate , New Delhi 110 002.

2. State Project Director-SSA Office of the UEE Missions Govt. of NCT of Delhi

I Floor, Near Estate Branch

Department of Education

Distt.-North, Lucknow Road

Delhi 110 054 . Respondents

(By Advocate: Shri Vijay Pandita)

ORDER (ORAL)

By Hon ble Mr.A.K.Bhardwaj,

MA No. 2532/2013

For the reasons stated therein, MA is allowed.

OA 3104/2013

The applicants were appointed as Resource Teachers in SSA (UEE Mission) on the following dates :-

S.No. Name File No. Date of appointment

1. Shri Ratnesh Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Surender Nath Singh 36 MR 13.07.2009

2 Shri Desh Raj Patel S/oShri Ram Raj Patel 21 HI 13.07.2009

3. Shri Shravan Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Vindhyachal Yadav 19 HI 13.07.2009

4 Shri Atif Ali S/o Shri Majid Ali 259 MR 19.02.2011

5. Shri Ram Gopal S/o Shri Radhey Shyam 46 MR 15.02.2011

6. Shri Nityanend S/o Shri Gore Lal Singh 99 BI 17.02.2011

7. Ms. Sulakshana Yadav D/o Shri Veer Singh 43 MH 13.07.2009

8. Shri Jayram Singh Yadav S/o Shri Prahaled Singh Yadav 285 MR 19.02.2011

9. Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh S/o Shri Ram Dhani Singh 182 HI 18.02.2011

10. Shri Surendra Kumar S/o Shri Ram Lakhan 190 HI 18.02.2011

11. Shri Kalendra Bharti S/o Shri Ram 24 HI 12.08.2009

12. Shri Surender Yadav S/o Shri Dinesh Chander Yadav 60 HI 27.07.2010

13. Shri Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Hari Lal 117 VI 17.02.2011

14. Shri Vinod Kumar Verma S/o Shri Hari Lal Verma 106 VI 17.02.2011

15. Ms.Reetu D/o Raman Singh 42 MR 18.02.2011

16. Ms. Indresh Varma D/o Shri Om Prakash Varma 189 HI 18.02.2011

17. Shri Navin Gour S/o Shri Umesh Kumar 186 HI 18.02.2011

18. Shri Mukesh Kumar Dhania S/o Shri Man Singh 110 VI 25.02.2011

19. Shri Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Ram Charan Meena 128 VI 25.02.2011

20. Ms. Soni Singh S/o Shri Suranjay Singh 169 HI 25.02.2011

21. Shri Rajender Prasad Suredia S/o Shri Jagdeesh Prasad Suredia 284 MR 25.02.2011

22. Shri Munna Lal Chauhan S/o Shri Cheedi Chauhan 153 HI 28.02.2011

23. Shri Tejpal Singh S/o Shri Mukat Singh 39 MR 13.07.2009

24. Shri Dharmender Kumar S/o Mauji Lal 248 MR 15.02.2011

25. Ms. Monika D/o Shri Prakash Chand 219 MR 19.02.2011

26. Ms. Anju Tiwari D/o Ashok Kumar 58 VI 17.02.2011

27.. Ms. Meeta Das D/o Shri Madhu Das 305 MR 19.02.2011

28. Ms. Suman D/o K.L.Sharma 205 MR 19.02.2011

29. Ms. Shashi Katiyal W/o Pawan Katiyal 258 MR 19.02.2011

30. Shri Amarjeet S/o Shri Chandramma 121 VI 17.02.2011

31. Shri Sandhya Sah D/o Shri H.P.Sah CP-29 18.02.2011

32. Ms. Neeta Kumari Basu D/o Basudev 46 MR 24.07.2009

33. Ms. Manisha Pandey D/o Shri Ashish Kumar 239 MR 19.02.2011

34. Ms. Rekha D/o Bhori Lal 48 MR 13.07.2009

35. Ms. Asha Kumari W/o Shri Virendera Kumar 297 MR 19.02.2011

36. Shri Girish Kumar S/o Shri Ram Gopal 296 MR 19.02.2011

37. Shri Balram Meena S/o Bheru Lal Meena 304 MR 18.02.2011

38. Ms Madhu Bala Kumari D/o Shri Tun Tun Prasad 32 MR 13.07.2009

39. Shri Deep Chandra Tiwari S/o Shri Vimal Tiwari 174 HI 25.02.2011

40 Shri Saurabh Tiwari S/o Vimal Chandra Tiwari 97 VI 25.02.2011

41. Ms.Anju Kumari D/o Shri Sambhu Lal 253 MR 03.03.2011

42. Ms.Anamika Verma D/o Shri Kamlesh Kumar Verma 187 HI 03.03.2011

43. Shri Ashish Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Kamala Prasad Yadav 59 HI 04.05.2010

44. Shri Bisheshwar Kumar S/o Shri Hira Ram 120 VI 28.02.2011

45. Shri Reena Shakya W/o Shri Abdesh Kumar 211 MR 19.02.2011

46. Shri Sandeep Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Ganga Saran Pandey 136 HI 18.02.2011

47. Ms. Sandhya D/o Shri Gobind Saran Mishra 270 MR 19.02.2011

48. Ms. Pushpa Rawat D/o Shri B.S.Rawat 266 MR 19.02.2011

49. Ms. Seema D/o Shri Balwant Singh 246 MR 19.02.2011

50. Ms. Krishna Baluni W/o Shri Naresh Baluni 261 MR 19.02.2011

51. Shri Navneet Kumar Dwivedi S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Dwivedi 254 MR 19.02.2011

52 Shri Shradha Mishra D/o Shri Nawal Kishore Mishra 62 VI 17.02.2011

53. Shri Subhash Chand Nagar S/o Shri Om Parkash 290 MR 19.02.2011

54. Shri Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Shaker 175 HI 18.02.2011

55. Shri Panna Lal S/o Shri Banvasi Lal 23 HI 13.07.2009

56. Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Rama Kant Sharma 07 VI 17.02.2011

57. Shri Rajesh Kumar S/o Shri Bhart Ram 18 HI 13.07.2009

58. Ms.Sarika Sawaria W/o Shri Naresh Kumar 226 MR 19.02.2011

59. Ms. Anuradha W/o Gaje Singh 225 MR 19.02.2011

60. Ms. Sushma Singh Rawat W/o Shri Sanjiv Singh Rawat 238 MR 19.02.2011

61. Ms. Kusum Pant W/o Shri Manoj Pant 240 MR 19.02.2011

62. Ms. Neelam Agarwal W/o Late Narender Kumar 141 HI 19.02.2011

63. Ms. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Fattan Singh 103 MR 19.02.2011

64. Ms. Sushma Tiwari W/o Shri K.K.Tiwari 17 HI 13.07.2011

65. Ms. Aradhana Singh W/o Ms. Ritu Raj Singh 13 HI 13.07.2009

66. Ms. Rakhi Gupta W/o Dr. Rakesh Kumar 44 MR 15.02.2011

67. Mr. Usha W/o Shri Rajesh Kumar 53 MR 15.02.2011

68. Ms. Asha Rani W/o Shri Hem Chand 22 MR 19.02.2011

69. Ms. Manju Bala W/o Late Gopal Dass Ahuja 236 MR 19.02.2011

70. Ms. Parul D/o Shri Rana Pratap Singh 243 MR 19.02.2011

71. Ms. Shalini Jain W/o Shri Saurabh Kumar Jain HI 165 18.02.2011

72. Ms. Bhawna Sharma W/o Sudhakar Sharma HI 16 24.06.2009

2. The grievance of the applicant in the present OA is against introduction of CTET qualification for engagement of Resource Teachers on contract basis. Shri Ashok Aggarwal, learned counsel for applicant submitted that the respondents need Resource Teachers who could impart special education to disabled children in different schools of NCT of Delhi Government and requirement of such teachers was approximately 2400, while with the fresh qualification made essential for the post i.e. CTET, only about 146 candidates were found to be eligible to work as Resource Teacher on contract basis.

3. On the other hand, Shri Vijay Pandita, learned counsel for respondents submitted that the applicants were appointed only in a project where there is no need of more Resource Teachers. Relying upon the letter dated 11th February, 2011 of National Council for Teacher Education, he submitted that in terms of the provisions of sub-section 1 of Section 23 of the RTE Act, the National Council for Teacher Education had issued notification dated 23.08.2010 laying the minimum qualification of the persons eligible for appointment as teacher for class I to VIII and one of the essential qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in any of the schools referred to in clause (n) of section 2 of the RTE Act is that he/she should have passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). He also placed reliance on 199th PAB meeting dated 12.04.2013 to espouse his argument that the contractual appointment of the applicant was only in a project. Finally he referred to Judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High in W.P.(C) No.2544/2013 & CM Nos.4818-19/2013, Ruchika Arora & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. wherein the Hon ble Delhi High Court ruled that what qualification should be required to be satisfied by a candidate need to be looked into by the specialized body and should not be gone into by the court. Admittedly, the said judgment was upheld by a DB of the Hon ble High Court.

4. Rejoining the submissions, Shri Ashok Aggarwal, learned counsel for the applicant referred to Section 23 (2) of Right to Education Act and submitted that when the respondents are unable to find sufficient number of trained teachers possessing minimum qualification as provided in at the act Section 23 (1), the Central

Government, if necessary, by a notification could relax the qualification required for appointment of teachers. He also submitted that in terms of Section 25 & 26 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, it is imperative for the respondents to ensure that the Pupil-Teacher Ratio as specified under schedule is maintained.

5. We heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. As has been ruled by Delhi High Court in Ruchika Arora & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors (ibid), it is not for us to take a view that what qualification is required for a teacher to become eligible for a particular post.

7. Nevertheless, as has been provided in the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the Central Government may relax the minimum qualification for the post to have sufficient teachers to abide by the Section 25 & 26 of the Act. Shri Ashok Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant specifically submitted that sufficient number of Resource Teachers should be available with Government of NCT of Delhi for the project in question.

8. In the circumstances, the OA is disposed of with direction to the respondents to assess the requirement of Resource Teachers in the project in question and if it is found that sufficient eligible teachers are not available to discharge the function as Resource Teacher in the project on contract basis, they would take up the matter to relax the condition of minimum qualification in terms of Section 23 (2). They will examine whether there is any need to appoint Resource Teachers by relaxing the minimum qualification in the case of the applicant. It is made clear that if there is no teacher required in the stream of Resource Teacher, it would not be mandatory to respondents to enhance the requirement to accommodate the applicants. Nevertheless, while doing the aforesaid exercise, they would Keep in view Sections 25 & 26 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

OA stands disposed of.

( Dr. B.K. Sinha ) ( A.K. Bhardwaj )

Member (A) Member (J)

UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET

Sarkari Naukri Sarkari Naukri Damad India. Latest Upadted Indian Govt Jobs - http://sarkari-damad.blogspot.com Published at http://sarkari-damad.blogspot.com (Click on the Labels below for more similar Jobs)

Friday, October 30, 2015

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - CTET RESULT DECLARED - Check CTET result Sept 2015 on ctet.nic.in Pass Percentage in CTET September 2015 is 17.48% Good Result This Time

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - CTET RESULT DECLARED -

Check CTET result Sept 2015 on ctet.nic.in Pass Percentage in CTET September 2015 is 17.48% Good Result This Time

CENTRAL TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (CTET) - SEP 2015

Enter your Roll Number

SEE CTET RESULT HERE ->>>>

http://cbseresults.nic.in/CTET-SEP/ctet15_sep.htm

Check CTET result Sept 2015 on ctet.nic.in , Pass Percentage in CTET September 2015 is 17.48%

The result of 8th edition of Central Teachers Eligibility Test (CTET) September 2015 has been declared by the Central Board of Secondary Education on 30th October 2015.

This examination was conducted in 76 cities at 959 centres. The Board had displayed the images of the OMR sheets of all the candidates who had appeared in CTET September 2015 along with answer key on CTET website.

A total number of 6,55,660 candidates appeared for examination out of which 1,14,580 candidates successfully passed the CTET held in September 2015. The overall pass percentage of candidate who appeared in CTET September 2015 is 17.48% whereas in last CTET held in February 2015 the overall pass percentage was 12.18%.

*******************************************************

UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - CTET RESULT DECLARED - Check CTET result Sept 2015 on ctet.nic.in

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - CTET RESULT DECLARED -

Check CTET result Sept 2015 on ctet.nic.in

CENTRAL TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (CTET) - SEP 2015

Enter your Roll Number

SEE CTET RESULT HERE ->>>>

http://cbseresults.nic.in/CTET-SEP/ctet15_sep.htm

NOTIFICATION

The result of the Central Teacher Eligibility Test conducted on 20th September 2015 has been declared and the same is available on CTET website www.ctet.nic.in and CBSE website www.cbse.nic.in. The candidates are advised to check their result by login on CTET and CBSE website. The Marksheet of all the candidates who appeared and certificate of qualifying candidates only shall be dispatched shortly. The schedule of CTET for 2016 are as under: 9 th Edition of CTET will be held on 21st February 2016 (Sunday) 10th Edition of CTET will be held on 18th September 2016 (Sunday)

Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) conducted the CTET 2015 examination at 959 centers across India. All the candidates who are interested in teacher jobs applied and appeared for the examination on 20th September 2015. Candidates who have written the examination are eagerly waiting for the results. CBSE has declared the results. Candidates can check the results now. Also, Candidates can get the expected cut-offs for the September 2015 Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) from here. The Board will decide the CTET Cut Off marks 2015 based on the vacancies and number of candidates appeared in the exam. The board will release the CTET Cut off list 2015 for category wise like OBC cut off, CTET Gen cut off, CTET cut off for SC and CTET cut off ST. The general qualifying score in the CTET 2015 is 60% and above marks will be issued eligibility certificate. CBSE will release the cut-off marks soon. However, candidates can check the expected cut-off marks from here. Also, aspirants can check the results from the official website or from the direct link provided above.

CBSE CTET 2015 Results and Expected Cut-Offs:
The Central Board of Secondary Education is a Board of Education for public and private schools, under the Union Government of India. Teacher Eligibility Test known as TET is an Indian entrance examination for teachers. The test is mandatory for getting teaching jobs in government schools from Class 1 to Class 8. Paper 1 is meant for teachers opting for Class 1 to Class 5 and Paper 2 for Class 6 to Class 8. The National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) had vide Notification dated 23 August 2010 and 29 July 2011 laid down the minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in classes I to VIII. It had been inter alia provided that one of the essential qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in any of the schools.This year CTET 2015 examination was conducted and the results are going to declare soon. Candidates can check the expected cut-off marks so that they can tally the marks which they got by checking the official answer key. CBSE declared CTET 2015 results now and the candidates can check the results from the official website.

How to Check CBSE CTET 2015 Expected Cut-Offs:
Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) is conducted to recruit the eligible candidates for the teacher posts. Candidates who had appeared for the CTET 2015 examination can check the expected cut-off marks and can know their result. CBSE has released the official answer key, aspirants can also check the key. However, CBSE is going to release the CTET 2015 results this week. Candidates can check the results from the official website or from the direct link provided below as soon as after the release.

This examination was conducted in 76 cities at 959 centres.

exams Representational Image

The result of 8th edition of Central Teachers Eligibility Test (CTET) September 2015 has been declared by the Central Board of Secondary Education on 30th October 2015.

This examination was conducted in 76 cities at 959 centres. The Board had displayed the images of the OMR sheets of all the candidates who had appeared in CTET September 2015 along with answer key on CTET website.

A total number of 6,55,660 candidates appeared for examination out of which 1,14,580 candidates successfully passed the CTET held in September 2015. The overall pass percentage of candidate who appeared in CTET September 2015 is 17.48% whereas in last CTET held in February 2015 the overall pass percentage was 12.18%.

The Board has also announced the schedule of CTET for 2016 the 9th edition of CTET will be held on 21 February 2016 (Sunday) and 10th edition of CTET will be held on 18th September 2016 (Sunday)

UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET

Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Himachal Pradesh TET Examination / HPTET News : - http://hptet.blogspot.com/ सरकारी स्कूलों में रसूखदार शिक्षकों की मौज

Himachal Pradesh TET Examination / HPTET News : - http://hptet.blogspot.com/

सरकारी स्कूलों में रसूखदार शिक्षकों की मौज

Saturday, October 17, 2015-10:10 AM
मंडी: शिक्षा विभाग के युक्तिकरण पर सियासत भारी पड़ रही है। नए शैक्षणिक सत्र शुरू होते ही प्रदेश के स्कूलों और कालेजों के शिक्षकों की युक्तिकरण की सुगबुगाहट शुरू हुई थी लेकिन लगभग 7 महीने बीत जाने के बाद अभी तक ऐसे एक भी शिक्षक का तबादला नहीं हुआ है। प्रदेश सरकार कभी शिक्षा विभाग को युक्तिकरण के आदेश दे रही है और कभी वापस ले रही है जिससे शिक्षा विभाग भी निर्णय नहीं ले पा रहा है। प्रदेश के कई स्कूलों व कालेजों में शिक्षकों की कमी होने के कारण काम का बोझ अधिक है और कई स्कूलों में जरूरत से ज्यादा शिक्षक होने के कारण राजनीतिक रसूख वालों की मौज लगी है।

विदित है कि कई पहुंच वाले शिक्षक प्रदेश के कालेजों व स्कूलों में छात्रों की संख्या कम होने के बावजूद अपनी सेवाएं दे रहे हैं पर सरकार को अब उनको वहां से उठाने में परेशानी हो रही है जिससे सरकार के शिक्षा में गुणवत्ता लाने का जुमला हवा हवाई लग रहा है। प्रदेश में शिक्षकों के हजारों पद रिक्त होने के कारण पात्र बेरोजगार इस आस में बैठे हैं कि युक्तिकरण के बाद रिक्त पदों का खाका तैयार करके प्रदेश सरकार शिक्षकों की नई भर्ती करेगी लेकिन सरकार इस मामले पर कोई कदम नहीं उठा रही है।

हिमाचल कालेज प्राध्यापक संघ के प्रदेशाध्यक्ष प्रो. राजेश यादव ने कहा कि प्रदेश सरकार जो युक्तिकरण का फार्मूला अपनाने की योजना बना रही है वह व्यवहारिकता में सही नहीं है। प्रदेश भर के काजेलों में 700 प्राध्यापकों की जरूरत है। सरकार को शिक्षकों की व्यापक रूप में भर्ती करवानी चाहिए जिससे रूसा प्रणाली भी ठीक ढंग से चलेगी। इसके अलावा नए कालेजों को खोलने से पहले शिक्षकों का इंतजाम करना चाहिए ताकि बड़े कालेजों के शिक्षक वहां न भेजे जाएं।

सी. एंड वी. अध्यापक संघ के अध्यक्ष चमन शर्मा ने कहा कि सरकार पहले प्रदेश में 5 हजार के आसपास सी. एंड वी. शिक्षकों के रिक्त पदों को भरने के बारे में ठोस नीति बनाए उसके बाद युक्तिकरण करने का निर्णय ले। प्राथमिक शिक्षक संघ के जिलाध्यक्ष इंद्र सिंह भारद्वाज ने कहा कि सरकार का युक्तिकरण का निर्णय सही है पर इसे जल्द लागू करना चाहिए था। युक्तिकरण न होने के कारण कई स्कूलों में शिक्षकों पर अतिरिक्त बोझ पड़ रहा है। सरकार को युक्तिकरण के साथ रिक्त पदों को भरने के लिए भर्ती प्रक्रिया शुरू करनी चाहिए

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,

Rajasthan TET / RTET, BETET / Bihar TET, PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET

Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News

Friday, October 2, 2015

FLIPKART BIG BILLION DAY LOOT OFFER START FROM 13TH OCTOBER TO 17TH OCTOBER

Himachal Pradesh TET Examination / HPTET News : - http://hptet.blogspot.com/
#FLIPKART BIG BILLION DAY LOOT OFFER START FROM 13TH OCTOBER TO 17TH OCTOBER

flipkart mega sale, Big Billion Days Sales Plan flipkart, Flipkart 2015 big Billion Day Plan
The E-Commerce giant has planned to offer discounts on products from more than 70 categories. Flipkart came up with the idea

फ्लिपकार्ट के बेहतरीन प्रॉडक्ट्स की जानकारी हम अपने इस ब्लॉग पर देंगे - http://flipkartsaleonline.blogspot.com/

बिग बिलियन डे के बेहतरीन एवं सस्ते और अच्छे प्रोडक्ट्स की जानकारी के लिए हमारे ब्लॉग से बने रहें

Install Flipkart Mobile App ->> Clicke Here

Best Deal FLIPKART SNAPDEAL AMAZON on Mobile , Laptop and Other Clothing, Home Furnishing and Gift Accesories - http://flipkartsaleonline.blogspot.com Flipkart Best Deal

Friday, September 18, 2015

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - - सीटीईटी में पेन व घड़ी तक पर पाबंदी

CTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - -

सीटीईटी में पेन व घड़ी तक पर पाबंदी

सीबीएसई ने लागू किए कड़े नियम

परीक्षा हॉल में रबड़ व स्केल भी नहीं लेकर जा सकेंगे परीक्षार्थी,

सेंटर पर दिया जाएगा नीला पेन

एडमिट कार्ड के साथ किसी फोटो आई कार्ड से ही एंट्री

परीक्षा सेंटर पर 90 मिनट पहले पहुंचना होगा

नई दिल्ली (ब्यूरो)। देश भर में आगामी बीस सितंबर को होने वाले सेंट्रल टीचर ऐलिजिबेलिटी टेस्ट (सीटीईटी) के लिए सीबीएसई ने वही नियम लागू कर दिए हैं जो एआईपीएमटी के दौरान लागू किए गए थे। परीक्षा सेंटर में घड़ी, धूप का चश्मा, पेन व रबड़ नहीं ले जा सकेंगे। उम्मीदवारों को नीला पेन परीक्षा सेंटर पर ही उपलब्ध कराया जाएगा।
सीबीएसई ने साफ कर दिया है कि परीक्षा के तय समय से 90 मिनट पूर्व सेंटर पर पहुंचना होगा। उम्मीदवारों को जल्दी आने के लिए इसलिए कहा गया है कि ताकी उनकी जांच सही तरीके से की जा सके। सीटीईटी वेबसाइट से डाउनलोड एडमिट कार्ड ही वैध माना जाएगा। एडमिट कार्ड के साथ उम्मीदवारों को कोई एक फोटो आईडी कार्ड मसलन पैन कार्ड, आधार, वोटर कार्ड, पासपोर्ट या ड्राइविंग लाइसेंस लेकर आना होगा। अन्यथा सेंटर पर उन्हें प्रवेश नहीं मिलेगा। मोबाइल फोन, ब्लूटूथ, ईयरफोन, माइक्रोफोन, पेजर, हैंड बैंड, सेंटर पर ले जाने की सख्त मनाही है। कलाई घड़ी भी प्रतिबंधित रहेगी। हैंडबैग व छोटे पर्स, कैमरा, खाने की वस्तुएं, प्लास्टिक पाउच, केलकुलेटर, स्केल, राइटिंग पैड, कार्डबोर्ड, पेंसिल बॉक्स ले जाने की भी मनाही होगी। दो चरणों में होने वाली इस परीक्षा के पहले चरण की परीक्षा का समय सुबह 9.30 बजे से दोपहर 12 बजे तक है। नियमों के अनुसार उम्मीदवारों को आठ बजे सेंटर पर पहुंचना होगा।

UPTET  / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825 Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825 Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825 Teacher Recruitment Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET

Sunday, July 19, 2015

RTET SARKARI NAUKRI News- राजस्थान हाई कोर्ट Chief Justice Bench ने शिक्षा मित्रों / पेरा टीचर्स को बगैर टेट / सीधी भर्ती के बताया अवैध -

RTET SARKARI NAUKRI News- राजस्थान हाई कोर्ट Chief Justice Bench ने शिक्षा मित्रों / पेरा टीचर्स को बगैर टेट / सीधी भर्ती के बताया अवैध -

See Judgement ->>>
UPTET
Shiksha Mitra , Para Teacher अगर आप लोगो की कोई राय / टिप्पणी हो तो ब्लॉग पोस्ट में नीचे लिंक है , जरूर करें

राजस्थान हाई कोर्ट के चीफ जस्टिस सुनील अम्ब्वानी और जस्टिस प्रकाश गुप्ता की बेंच ने विद्यार्थी मित्र (उत्तर प्रदेश में इन पेरा शिक्षक को शिक्षा मित्र कहा जाता है ) को बगैर टेट / डायरेक्ट रिक्रूटमेंट के सही नहीं माना और स्पेशल अपील निस्तारित कर दी ।

उन्होंने शिक्षा में गुणवत्ता हेतु कई टिप्पणियां की और सुप्रीम कोर्ट के पूर्व निर्णय के कई अंशों को उद्धत किया

विद्यार्थी मित्रों / कॉन्ट्रेक्ट शिक्षकों की सेकड़ो याचिकाएं सिंगल बेंच ने ख़ारिज करते हुए उनकी सेवा समाप्ति को सही मन था , इसके बाद उनके सस्पेशल अपील पर निर्णय भी उनके विरुद्ध आया , दुखदलगा लेकिन न्याय तो अपनी जगह है , अगर भर्ती के कुछ नियम बने तो फिर उसका पालन
करते हुए न्याय ऐसे फैसले दे देता है , जो कई बार लोगो के लिए दुखद भी होते हैं

इस निर्णय में कई टेबल्स टेक्स्ट फॉर्म में नहीं आ पाई थी , और कुछ बातें पी डी ऍफ़ फाइल की छूट गयी , इसलिए पूरी कॉपी हाई कोर्ट की वेबसाइट पर देखें

*****************
Important Parts >>>
The appellant-petitioner was engaged as 'Vidhyarthi Mitra'

The appellants in other Special Appeal are amongst a large number of persons, who were appointed as 'Vidhyarthi Mitras', in the School of Elementary Education

state in continuing with the Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme and permitting the teaching by the unqualified persons in the schools run by the State is avowedly illegal, arbitrary and falls foul of Article 21A of the Constitution of India.

National Council of Teachers Education Act, by the NCTE, which has been declared as Academic Authority authorised by the Central Government by notification, it is not legally permissible to employ the teachers who have not passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (‘TET’)

30.It is well settled that the regular posts in the cadre are required to be filled in by way of the regular
recruitment process under the Rules. Of course, as noticed above, the urgent temporary appointment to the extent permissible under the Rules can be made till the availability of regularly selected candidates but then, the appointment on contractual basis is not envisaged under the relevant recruitment Rules. A

31. In this view of the matter, the Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme introduced by the State Government providing for engagement of Vidhyarthi Mitra on contractual basis against the vacant posts of Teachers in various cadres ignoring the eligibility qualification prescribed and the procedure prescribed for the recruitment is ex facie dehors the relevant recruitment Rules

Najuk Umra Mein Bachhon ke Saath Supreme Court Ne Achhe Shikshkon Dwara Shiksha Par Jor Deeya Hai ->>>

The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again has emphasized for quality educations in the schools and deprecated the practice of employing unqualified untrained teachers to teach the children of tender age in the schools.

19. We are of the view that quality of education to be imparted to the children in the school cannot be compromised at any costs. Even if, there are vacancies, the posts are not allowed to be filled up by teachers who are not trained and who are not

21. We also do not find any good ground to issue any directions to allow any ad hoc arrangement and declare that the State Government shall not compromise with the legal position as explained by learned Single Judge. There shall be no recruitment of Vidhyarthi Mitra nor any scheme will be made on ad hoc basis or of unqualified teacher or even qualified teacher de hors the service rules.

22. The Special Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

*********************************************

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
: JUDGMENT: Hitesh Parihar

Vs.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
D.B.Civil Special Appeal (W) No.21/2014
Date of Judgment ::: 21 st    November 2014

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.SUNIL AMBWANI

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Dr.Nupur Bhati      )

Mr.Ravindra Singh ) for the appellant

Mr.B.L.Bhati, Government Counsel for the respondents

(Reportable)

BY THE COURT (Per Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani, Actg.CJ)

1.

The appellant-petitioner was engaged as 'Vidhyarthi Mitra', on contract in the year 2006 and thereafter to teach the students in Government Primary School, Chhipi, District Jalore.

His services were dispensed with on completion of three months, after which, he was re-appointed on contract in the year 2009 and worked upto January 2010.

2. The appellants in other Special Appeal are amongst a large number of persons, who were appointed as 'Vidhyarthi Mitras', in the School of Elementary Education and the Schools of
Secondary Education on the vacancies of Teacher Gr.III, Senior Teachers and Lecturers on contract for specified period, awaiting regular appointment by the State Government and Panchayats in the vacancies.

3. A large number of writ petitions were filed by Vidhyarthi 2 Mitras to allow them to continue until regular appointments are made. A batch of writ petitions led by S.B.Civil Writ Petition
No.4652/2009 connected with 362 petitions was decided by Jaipur Bench of this Court on 08.09.2009, declaring the last extension to be arbitrary and illegal; and the consequential
automatic termination orders were set aside. The respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioners for continuation in service till regularly selected candidates from RPSC/persons selected and recommended by DPC for promotion are made available in the light of the observations made in the judgment.   It was observed that in case the regularly selected candidates from RPSC/persons selected and recommended by RPSC for promotion are made available, then the respondents can terminate services of the petitioners after preparation of the seniority list on the State level as per their date of appointment and merit assigned to them by following the principle of ‘last
come first go’ to the extent of availability of selected candidates keeping in view the interest of the present students and prospective students.

4. In Devendra Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.2579/2009) and other 502 connected petitions, decided on 15.05.2009 , the judgment in S.B.Civil Writ Petition
No.4652/2009 was followed.

5. A Division Bench of this Court while issuing notices on the special appeals preferred by the State Government, dismissed the special appeals preferred by the petitioners vide judgment
dated 17.09.2009 in Rajendra Kumar Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan: (2010(1) WLC 171)

6. In Prahlad Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan: (2010(3) WLC 619)
, the writ petitions were disposed of with directions that cases of the petitioners for transfer and absorption under the Rationalisation and Equalisation Policy in the Blocks/Tehsils and Districts as required by the Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner dated 26.06.2010 will be considered but shall not confer any right on the petitioners serving as Vidhyarthi Mitras to continue in the said position after the end of the academic session 2010-11 unless the State Government itself takes a
decision otherwise in this regard.   The directions were given in respect of Vidhyarthi Mitras who had worked in the academic years 2008-09 and 2009-10 including those who had not workedon the academic year 2009-2010. They were not held entitled to regularisation but if such Vidhyarthi Mitras make representations for the academic year 2010-11 their cases were directed to be
considered for re-employment.

7. The petitioner as well as other Vidhyarthi Mitras aggrieved by the termination of their services and refusal to continue them pursuant to the decision taken by the State Government, filed the writ petitions giving rise to this special appeal claiming the reliefs as were given in Prahlad Kumar’s case.

8.Learned Single Judge, by a detailed and erudite judgment, while taking into consideration the entire gamut of Service Rules and the norms laid down by the National Council for TeachersEducation (‘NCTE’) established under the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993; Article 21A inserted vide Constitution (Eighty Sixth Amendment) Act, 2002; the
4 enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009; and the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Andhra Kesri Education Society Vs. Director of School
Education: AIR 1989 SC 1983 and L.Muthu Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.: (2000) 7 SCC 618, has held that with the change in law and the notification dated 23.08.2010
issued under Section 23 of the National Council of Teachers Education Act, by the NCTE, which has been declared as Academic Authority authorised by the Central Government by notification, it is not legally permissible to employ the teachers who have not passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (‘TET’) which is to be conducted by appropriate government in accordance with the guidelines framed by NCTE. It was also found that NCTE has already framed guidelines for conducting TET, which provides for academic qualifications; and that such qualifications have been incorporated by the State Government under Rule 266 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (‘the Rules of 1996’)
quoted in the judgment.

9. The perceptible change in law, as noticed by learned Single Judge, has also been accepted by the State of Rajasthan by amending Rules of 1996 and Section 89 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (‘Act of 1994’) by the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2000 after which it was no
longer possible to allow any ad hoc arrangement to be continued. Learned Single Judge found that in view of the change in law by constitutional amendment and by regulations framed by NCTE by notification dated 23.08.2010 and amendments in the rules related to recruitment of teachers in
5the State of Rajasthan, the scheme of Shiksha Mitra which was an ad hoc scheme as stop gap arrangement until recruitment is made, has become unconstitutional. It is useful to quote the observations made by learned Single Judge in paragraphs 26 to 39 as follows:-

“26. It is to be noticed that as per Rule 263 of the Rules of 1996, specifically provides that subject to the provisions of the Rules and the directions of the Government, if any, the Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad shall determine and intimate the Committee (District Establishment Committee) every year the number of vacancies anticipated under each category during the year and the number of persons likely to be recruited by each method. That apart, Rule 284(1) of the Rules of 1996 mandates that in case no selection has been made or no person selected by the Committee is available at any time
for filling a vacancy, appointment may be made by the Appointing Authority on urgent temporary basis for a period not exceeding six months provided that such person shall be appointed only on contract basis with prior approval of the District Establishment Committee in case of Panchayats and approval of the State Government in case of Panchayat Samiti/Zila Parishad. Besides, as per Rule 284(2), if it is proposed to fill the vacancy by direct recruitment temporarily nearest Employment Exchange may be asked to send names of persons possessing required qualification at least five times the number of vacancies to be so filled and out of those persons, the
Appointing Authority shall appoint the persons suitable for the post.

27. The recruitment to the post of Senior Teacher and School Lecturer is governed by the Rules of 1971 and Rules of 1970 respectively, framed by the Governor in exercise of the power conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The recruitment to the posts of Senior Teachers and School Lecturers are required to be made by direct recruitment as well as by promotion in
the proportion indicated in the Schedule attached to the 6 relevant recruitment Rules. The recruitment Rules specifically provides for yearwise determination of actual number of vacancies occurring belonging to the promotion and direct recruitment quota as on 1st April every year. It is pertinent to note that in exercise of the power conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the
Governor of Rajasthan vide notification dated 23.9.08, promulgated Rajasthan Various Service (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2008, which specifically provides that direct recruitment to the post specified in the Schedule shall be held at least once a year unless the Government decides that the direct recruitment for any of these posts shall not be held in any particular year. The Rules of 1970
and Rules of 1971 finds mention at serial No.20 and 52 of the Schedule. It is not the case of the respondents that any decision was taken by the Government not to make the recruitment for any of the posts en-cadred under the Rules of 1970 and Rules of 1971. Thus, indisputably, in terms of the relevant recruitment Rules, the State Government is under an obligation to determine the
yearwise vacancies and proceed with the recruitment process to fill up the vacancies in the cadre in accordance with the relevant Rules.

28. It is pertinent to note that Rule 27 of the Rules of 1970 and Rule 28 of the Rules of 1971 provides for urgent temporary appointment against the vacancy in service which cannot be filled in immediately either by direct recruitment or by promotion under the Rules, by appointing in an official capacity the persons eligible for appointment to the post by promotion or by appointing
temporarily thereto a person eligible for direct recruitment to the service under the provisions of the Rules. Suffice it to say that under the relevant recruitment Rules, no person lacking eligibility qualification could be appointed on the various posts in the cadre even on urgent temporary basis.

29. In the backdrop of position of law, as aforesaid, adverting to the Scheme, it is significant to note that the appointment of Vidhyarthi Mitra on contractual basis thereunder was sought to be made on the pretext that the 7 regular recruitment process of Teachers in various cadres is likely to take a long time. One fails to understand that if regular recruitment in the cadre was likely to take a long
time and there was non-availability of the duly selected candidates then what prevented the State Government from resorting to recruitment process under the Rules for urgent temporary appointment against the vacant posts of eligible candidates till the availability of duly selected candidates. Strangely enough under the Scheme framed the requirement of the eligibility of the candidates for the
recruitment to the post of Teachers as provided for under the relevant recruitment Rules and by NCTE was also ignored inasmuch as the Scheme permitted even the engagement of persons who are not trained to discharge the duties of the Teachers in various Schools.

30.It is well settled that the regular posts in the cadre are required to be filled in by way of the regular
recruitment process under the Rules. Of course, as noticed above, the urgent temporary appointment to the extent permissible under the Rules can be made till the availability of regularly selected candidates but then, the appointment on contractual basis is not envisaged under the relevant recruitment Rules. As a matter of fact, even the urgent temporary appointment in any public service to any post de hors the relevant Rules without permission of the competent authority is prohibited under Section 4 of the Act of 1999. Rather, the appointment in contravention of the provisions of the Act of 1999 is an offence punishable under the provisions of Section 14 of the Act of 1999.

31. In this view of the matter, the Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme introduced by the State Government providing for engagement of Vidhyarthi Mitra on contractual basis against the vacant posts of Teachers in various cadres ignoring the eligibility qualification prescribed and the procedure prescribed for the recruitment is ex facie dehors the relevant recruitment Rules. That apart, the
recruitment of Teachers lacking eligibility qualification runs contrary to the Regulations,2001 framed by the NCTE, which have statutory force. As a matter of fact, the 8 NCTE having prescribed the eligibility qualification, the State Government cannot proceed to appoint the persons
on the posts of Teachers by giving the fictitious designation i.e. Vidhyarthi Mitra to teach the children who are mandatorily required to be taught by the persons eligible for recruitment to the post as per the eligibility qualification laid down by the NCTE.

32. As noticed above, by way of Constitution (Eighty Sixth Amendment) Act, 2002, Article 21A was inserted in the Constitution which makes right to education, a fundamental right, and provides that State shall provide free and compulsory education all children of 6 to 14 years in such manner as the State by law provides.

Indisputably, so as to implement the provisions of Article 21A of the Constitution, the Act of 2009 has been enacted by the Parliament which mandates that only the persons possessing minimum qualification as laid down by an academic authority authorised by the Central Government
by notification shall be eligible for appointment on the posts of Teachers. As a matter of fact, it is not even disputed before this Court that the academic body, NCTE, under the authorization of the Government has already laid down the eligibility qualification and therefore, any person not possessing the requisite qualification as provided for by the NCTE cannot be appointed on the
posts of Teachers in the various schools run by the State or otherwise.

33. It needs to be noticed that besides providing for the eligibility qualification for recruitment to the posts of Teachers, the Act of 2009, Section 6 thereof specifically mandates that for carrying out the provisions of the Act, the appropriate Government and the local authority shall establish within such area or limits of neighborhood as may be prescribed a school where it is not established,
within a period of 3 years from the commencement of the Act. As per Section 7 of the Act of 2009, the Central Government and the State Government have concurrent responsibility for providing funds for carrying out the provisions of the Act. As per mandate of Section 8, the appropriate Government is under an obligation to provide 9 infrastructure including school buildings, teaching staffs
and learning material to ensure good quality elementary education conforming to the standards and norms specified in the Schedule. The emphasis under the Act is on ensuring that all children have access to quality education that enables them to the skills, knowledge, values and attitude necessary to become responsible and active citizens of India. To achieve the intended objects even the Pupil-Teacher Ratio in a school has been specified in the Schedule which is mandated to be
maintained in each school by virtue of provisions of Section 25 of the Act. Suffice it to say that right to compulsory education enshrined in Article 21A of the Constitution of India presupposes quality education to the children and therefore, the State is under an obligation to make all efforts to ensure that the children of tender age may not suffer on account of teaching by unqualified
teachers. In this view of the matter, the action of the State in continuing with the Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme and permitting the teaching by the unqualified persons in the schools run by the State is avowedly illegal, arbitrary and falls foul of Article 21A of the Constitution of India.

34. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again has emphasized for quality educations in the schools and deprecated the practice of employing unqualified untrained teachers to teach the children of tender age in the schools.

35.In N.M.Nageshwaramma vs. State of A.P., 1986 Supp. SCC 166, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed: “
The teachers' training institutes are meant to teach children of impressionable age and we cannot let
loose on the innocent and unwary children, teachers who have not received proper and adequate
training. True they will be required to pass the examination but that may not be enough. Training
for a certain minimum period in a properly organized and equipped training institute is probably
essential before a teacher may be duly lanunched.”

36.In Andhra Kesari Educational Society v. Director of School Education, (1989) 1 SCC 392, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed:
10 “ .... Though teaching is the last choice in the job market, the role of teacher is central to all
processes of formal education. The teacher alone could bring out the skills and intellectual
capabilities of students. He is the “engine” of the education system. He is a principal instrument in
awakening the child to cultural values. He needs to be endowed and energised with needed potential to deliver enlightened service expected of him. His quality should be such as would inspire and
motivate into action the benefitter (sic benefactor).

He must keep himself abreast of ever-changing conditions. He is not to perform in a wooden and
unimaginative way. He must eliminate fissiparous tendencies and attitudes and infuse nobler and
national ideas in younger minds. His involvement in national integration is more important, indeed
indispensable. It is , therefore, needless to state that teachers should be subjected to rigorous
training with rigit scrutiny of efficiency. It has greater relevance to the needs of the day. The ill-
trained or sub-standard teachers would be detrimental to our educational system; if not a
punishment on our children. The Government and the University must, therefore, take care to see
that inadequacy in the training of teachers is not compounded by any extraneous consideration.”

37.In the matter of 'State of Rajasthan v. Vikas Sahebrao Roundale', (1992) 4 SCC 435, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court observed:
“ The teacher plays pivotal role in moulding the career, character fibres and aptitude for educational
excellence in impressive young children. The formal educational needs proper equipment by the teachers to meet the challenges of the day to impart lessons with latest techniques to the students on secular, scientific and rational outlook. A well-equipped teacher could bring the needed skills and intellectual capabilities of the students in their pursuits. The teacher is adorned as gurudevobhava, next after parents, as he is a principal instrument to awakening the child to the cultural ethos, intellectual excellence and discipline. The teachers, therefore, must keep abreast of ever-changing techniques, the needs of the society and to cope with the psychological approach to the aptitudes of the children to perform that pivotal role. In short teachers need to be endowed and energised with needed potential to serve the needs of the society. The qualitative training in the training colleges or schools would inspire and motivate them into action to the benefit of the students. For equipping such trainee students in a school or a college all facilities and equipments are absolutely necessary and institutions bereft thereof have no place to exist nor entitled to recognition. In that behalf compliance with the statutory requirement is insisted upon. Slackening 11 the standard and judicial fiat to control the mode of education and examining system are detrimental to the efficient management of the education.”

38. In the matter of “L.Muthukumar and Another vs. State of T.N. & Ors.”, (2000) 7 SCC 618, while relying upon earlier decisions noticed above, the Hon'ble Supreme Court opined that before teachers are allowed to teach innocent children, they must receive appropriate and adequate training in a recognized training institutes satisfying the prescribed norms, otherwise the standard of education and careers of children will be jeopardized. The court observed that allowing ill-trained teachers coming
out of de-recognized or un-recognized institutes or licensing them to teach children of an impressionable age, contrary to the norms prescribed will be detrimental to the
interest of the nation itself in the sense that in the process of building a great nation, teachers and
educational institutions also play a vital role.

39. In Uma Devi's case (supra) heavily relied upon by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed :
“2.Public employment in a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic, has to be as set down
by the Constitution and the laws made thereunder. Our constitutional scheme envisages employment
by the Government and its instrumentalities on the basis of a procedure established in that behalf
Equality of opportunity is the hallmark, and the Constitution has provided also for affirmative action
to ensure that unequals are not treated as equals. Thus, any public employment has to be in terms of
the constitutional scheme.

3.A sovereign Government, considering the economic situation in the country and the work to
be got done, is not precluded from making temporary appointments or engaging workers on
daily wages. Going by a law newly enacted, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005,
the object is to give employment to at least one member of a family for hundred days in a year, on
paying wages as fixed under that Act.

But, a regular process of recruitment or appointment has to be resorted to, when regular vacancies in posts, at a particular point of time, are to be filled up and the filling up of those vacancies cannot be done in a haphazard manner or based on patronage or other considerations. Regular appointment must be the rule.

” (Emphasis added)

12 It is true that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that a sovereign Government is not precluded from making temporarily appointments or engaging workers on daily wages basis, taking into consideration the economic situation in the country and work to be got done. But then, the Scheme as framed by the State Government is not an employment Scheme as such but
rather it is a Scheme framed bypassing the regular recruitment process, which as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uma Devi's case (supra) must be a rule.

In any case, the sovereign Government has to function within the constitutional limit and cannot be permitted to frame the Scheme in violation of the laws and the constitutional scheme governing the public employment.”

10. After considering the entire law on the subject, learned Single Judge held as under:-
“ 40. In view of the discussion above, this Court is firmly of the opinion that the Scheme introduced by the State Government providing for the engagement of even unqualified/untrained persons as Vidhyarthi Mitra for their posting against the posts of Teacher Gr.III, Senior Teacher and School Lecturer dehors the relevant recruitment Rules and the eligibility criteria laid down by
the NCTE exercising the power under the relevant statute, the provisions of the Act of 2009, and against the constitutional scheme of public employment, cannot but deemed to be illegal, arbitrary and falls foul of Article 14, 21 & 21A of the Constitution of India.”

11. Learned Single Judge was conscious of the fact that vacancies of the teachers engaged for elementary education and secondary education cannot be filled immediately and, thus,
keeping in view the interest of the students, an arrangement was made in paragraph-42 which reads as follows:-
“ 42.In the result, the writ petition No.8154/10
13 is allowed. The writ petitions preferred by the petitioners assailing their termination from service, claiming continuance/re-employment as Vidhyarthi Mitra and against the insistence of the Government for execution of the fresh contract, are dismissed. The Vidhyarthi Mitra
Scheme introduced by the State Government for engagement of 'Vidhyarthi Mitra' on contractual basis on fixed honorarium against the posts of Teachers Gr.III, Senior Teachers and School Lecturers is declared illegal and unconstitutional.
The respondents are restrained from engaging the Vidhyarthi Mitra under the Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme against the posts of Teachers Gr.III, Senior Teachers and School Lecturers. The respondents
are directed to proceed with the recruitment process to fill in all the vacant posts of Teachers and School Lecturers in various services/cadres forthwith and complete the process as early as possible, in any case, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that pending completion of the regular recruitment process, the State shall not be precluded from engaging the eligible persons on the various posts of Teachers on urgent temporary
basis in accordance with the relevant recruitment Rules.

The State shall also ensure that henceforth the determination of the vacancies of Teachers in various
services/cadres is made every year as mandated by the relevant recruitment Rules and all efforts shall be made to fill up the vacancies preferably before the next academic session starts in the schools run by the State.

The petitioners who have not been paid honorarium for the period they had worked with the respondents as Vidhyarthi Mitra, shall be paid the amount due within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that on account of the
Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme being declared illegal and unconstitutional, the petitioners and their likes who had worked with the respondents as Vidhyarthi Mitra, shall not be deprived of the benefits already accrued to them.

No order as to costs.”

14

12. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that there are large number of vacancies running into thousands in the Schools for Primary Education and Secondary
Education which cannot be filled up immediately. The Government has not taken any steps for direct recruitment on these vacancies; and that considering the interest of students,
who would be suffering greatly on account of non-availability of teachers, the Court may consider to extend the time by which all the vacancies may be filled up and until then the persons who
were disengaged as Vidhyarthi Mitras may be allowed to continue.

13.It is submitted that there can be no objections with the findings recorded and directions given by learned Single Judge, however, large number of Vidhyarthi Mitras are qualified to teach in the Schools for Primary Education and Secondary Education and thus, in the alternative, if the Court may not agree to allow the extension of time, at least, those Vidhyarthi Mitras, who are qualified, may be allowed to teach in the schools for the benefit of the students until direct recruitment is made.

It is submitted that interest of lakhs of students is going to suffer by the delay caused by the State Government in direct recruitment.

14. We are informed by learned counsel appearing for the State that after declaration of Vidhyarthi Mitra Scheme to be unconstitutional, the State Government has abolished the scheme, and that after 30.04.2014, no person is working or has been engaged to serve as Vidhyarthi Mitra. The orders of
learned Single Judge have been complied with and that the
15 State Government has proceeded to make direct recruitment on the vacancies of the teachers in all categories.

15.In order to find out the current situation of the vacancies on the post of teachers in the Schools in the State of Rajasthan,we asked State Counsel to give us a comprehensive chart showing the number of vacancies on sanctioned posts and the availability of trained Vidhyarthi Mitras. We also asked State Counsel to give us the status of the requisitions made and the proceedings pending for recruitment of teacher and the status of the Teachers’ Eligibility Test known in Rajasthan as REET. The chart produced by State Counsel is reproduced as under:-
************************************
Note from Blog - Tabular form ka chart ham yahan nahin de paa rahe hain, Kripya HC ki website se poora vivran dekhen
*****************************

Judegement continued >>>

INFORMATIONS WITH REGARD TO VIDYARTHI MITRA

16. We are pained to observe that despite directions issued by this Court on 21.10.2013 which have been followed to the extent that Vidhyarthi Mitra has been discontinued and that after 30.04.2014 no person is working as Vidhyarthi Mitras, effective steps have not been taken to fill up the vacancies. From the chart produced before us, we find that there are 11,472 vacancies of Teachers for Elementary Education as against 30,298 sanctioned posts; 20,908 vacancies of Senior Teachers
as against 69,884 sanctioned posts; and 18,310 vacancies of Lecturers as against 33,028 sanctioned posts. There are 7,999 trained teachers in elementary education, 1758 trained teachers Gr.III, 2283 trained Senior Teachers and 2229 trained Lecturers who were serving as Vidhyarthi Mitras. As against this, the requisitions are pending with the Rajasthan Public Service Commission for filling up 4010 teachers for the post of Lecturers, 9447 for the post of Teacher Gr.II and 20,000 for

17 Teacher Gr.III. For Teacher Gr.III, the requisition was sent about one year ago in August 2013.

17. We are also informed that for Teacher Gr.III, a recruitment was initiated in the year 2013 which is pending at various stages and that some of the petitions were decided by this Court against which Special Leave to Appeal pending in the Supreme Court in which directions have been issued to issue the third list. The appointments in pursuance to the recruitment are awaited.

18. We are unable to accede to the request of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to allow at least the trained Vidhyarthi Mitras to continue until all the posts are filled up. We do not find that considering the legal position as explained by learned Single Judge and his conclusions with which we entirely agree there is any scope to adjudicate any further on the issue of allowing Vidhyarthi Mitras to continue on the vacancies purportedly in the interest of the students. With the change in
law focussing on appointment of only trained Teachers with Teachers Training qualifications and the TET qualifications and appointment of such teachers only by direct recruitment in accordance with the Rules of recruitment, it is no longer possible for allowing any untrained teacher or even a trained
teacher who has not been regularly appointed to be allowed to continue on ad hoc basis or in contractual appointment.

19. We are of the view that quality of education to be imparted to the children in the school cannot be compromised at any costs. Even if, there are vacancies, the posts are not allowed to be filled up by teachers who are not trained and who are not
18 appointed by way of direct recruitment in accordance with extant rules which have been amended in tune with the notification issued by NCTE which has been declared as Academic Authority
by the Central Government. The concept of school education has undergone change after the amendment in the Constitution by inserting Article 21A and the enactment of Right of Children
to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The Notification dated 23.08.2010 is binding on all the States and Educational Authorities.   The Court is not empowered to compromise with
the legislative changes for the sake of equity for the contractual appointees, and empathy for the children to allow the ad-hoc arrangements to continue.

20. We have been benefitted from the judgment of Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sangeet Lodha who has researched on the subject and has taken pains to go deep into all the aspects of the matter in
rendering an exhaustive and complete judgment on the issue.

We do not find any error in the judgment to interfere in the special appeal.

21. We also do not find any good ground to issue any directions to allow any ad hoc arrangement and declare that the State Government shall not compromise with the legal position as explained by learned Single Judge. There shall be no recruitment of Vidhyarthi Mitra nor any scheme will be made on ad hoc basis or of unqualified teacher or even qualified teacher de hors the service rules.

22. The Special Appeal is accordingly dismissed.



(PRAKASH GUPTA), J.

    (SUNIL AMBWANI), Actg.CJ.

MK

RTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Teacher Recruitment  /SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  / SARKARI NAUKRI /  News

http://joinrtet.blogspot.com/

REET CTET, TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET), NCTE, RTE, UPTET, HTET, JTET / Jharkhand TET, OTET / Odisha TET , शिक्षक भर्ती
Rajasthan TET / RTET, BETET / Bihar TET, PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility Test, West Bengal TET / WBTET, MPTET / Madhya Pradesh TET, ASSAM TET / ATET
, UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET , APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TET, HPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET