UPTET / B. Ed Candidate :शिक्षक हाई कोर्ट , फिर सुप्रीम कोर्ट , फिर हाई कोर्ट और अटकी पडी नियुक्ति

 UPTET / B. Ed Candidate :शिक्षक हाई कोर्ट , फिर सुप्रीम कोर्ट , फिर हाई कोर्ट और अटकी पडी नियुक्ति

एक बी एड कैंडिडेट सन 2004 में विशिष्ट बी टी सी ट्रेनिंग से छूट गया था
उसने हाई कोर्ट में अपील की और हाई कोर्ट ने उसको ट्रेनिंग देने का निर्देश दिया , उसके बाद राज्य सरकार सुप्रीम कोर्ट गयी वहाँ सरकार की अपील ख़ारिज हुई ।

मध्याविधि में अन्य केंडिडेट को ट्रेनिंग के लिए भेज दिया गया परन्तु पेटिशनर केंडिडेट का मामला अदालत में चल रहा था और उसके उपयुकत निस्तारण के पेंडिंग होने की वजह से उसको ट्रेनिंग के लिए नहीं भेजा गया
समय बीतता गया और शिक्षा के अधिकार कानून के तहत केंद्र सरकार द्वारा अधिकृत एन सी टी ई ने शिक्षक बनने के लिए टी ई टी पास करना जरूरी कर दिया ।

हाई कोर्ट ने उपरोक्त बिंदुओं को देखते हुए यह फैसला दिया कि :
तथ्यों और सुप्रीम कोर्ट के आदेश के अनुसार याची  को ट्रेनिंग देने के लिए विचार किया जाये
लेकिन नियुक्ति के लिए याची के पास जब तक टी ई टी सर्टिफ़िकेट न हो कोई निर्देश नहीं दिया जा सकता 
अगर विवेचन करने में कुछ गलती हुई हो तो कमेंट के माध्यम से सूचित कर सकते हैं , सुधरने का प्रयत्न करेंगे 

See Court Order :

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 30

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18350 of 2006

Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar,Pankaj Govil,T.K. Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajeev Joshi

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajeev Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent no.6, learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.
By means of present writ petition the prayer is to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher in B.T.C. Grade in pursuance of the advertisement published in Newspaper dated 23.1.2004, annexure 3 to the writ petition. Further by an amendment application dated 16.9.2013 petitioner requested that prayer be amended.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was also one of the applicant to sent for Special B.T.C. Training. However, he was not sent and number of candidates, who were aggrieved approached the Court. Subsequently, the direction was issued by the High Court to sent for Special B.T.C. training against which State Government went to Supreme Court in special leave to appeal, which was dismissed. He also submitted that the other candidates are being sent by the State Government since the writ petition of the petitioner is pending hence petitioner is not going to be sent for Special B.T.C. Training.
Mr. Rajeev Joshi appearing on behalf of respondent no.6 submitted that now after the enactment and after the notification of the National Council for Teachers Education under 'the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009' by the Central Government, the National Council for Teachers Education has been notified and declared as competent authority with regard to issue certificate of T.E.T. for appointment of teachers only there would be eligible for appointment as teachers in the Basic Primary School as T.E.T. has been made compulsory for all candidates.
Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties. According to petitioner admittedly the advertisement was to sent for Special B.T.C. Training Course for the year 2004, thereafter for the Special B.T.C. Training Course 2008. This issue has been considered in division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.29 of 2013, Ashok Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and others. The controversy was settled by judgment dated 20.8.2013. It was held in the special appeal that after enactment of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and� the prescription of Teachers' Eligibility Test as the qualification for applying for the posts of Assistant Teachers in Primary School, which has also been incorporated under the U.P. Basic Education� Teacheres Act, 1981 it is no longer possible for the Court to issue directions to the State Government to fill up all the seats of Special B.T.C. Course 2008, and to continue to appoint the Assistant Teachers in the primary school. On the basis of said notification, the National Council for Teachers Education has been constituted by the Central Government. It is a competent authority to issue certificate for teachers eligibility test (T.E.T.) and the same has been prescribed as qualification for appointment of primary school teachers by the State Government vide notification dated 23.8.2010. Hence now it will not be possible to appoint any candidate only on the basis� that they have passed B.Ed examination or they have completed Special B.T.C. Course or bridge course. The candidates will not be eligible for appointment as Assistant Teacher in the primary school run by the Basic Eduction Board� under the finance of State Government unless they have passed T.E.T. examination. In the year 2011 T.E.T. was held and candidates were declared successful, who were appointed in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the State Government. Hence in view of the fact, if� persons are being sent for Special B.T.C. Course in pursuance of the order of the Apex Court the case of the petitioner may also be consider to sent him for training.
As far as the appointment is concerned, unless there is a T.E.T. certificate no direction has to be issued to appoint as Assistant Teacher in primary school.
Accordingly, present writ petition is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 10.10.2013
Pramod

Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2860802