उत्तर प्रदेश राजकीय कॉलेज एल टी ग्रेड शिक्षकों के पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट के अतिरिक्त अंक सम्बन्धी याचिका
L T Grade, LT Grade, LT Grade Teacher Recruitment UP, LT Grade Teacher Uttar Pradesh,
उत्तर
प्रदेश में एल टी ग्रेड शिक्षकों की भर्ती में पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट करने वालों
को 15 अतिरिक्त अंको का चयन में बी=वेटेज दिया जा रहा था ,
लेकिन बहुत
से लोग ऐसे भी थे जिन्होंने पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट किसी और विषय से किया था , और
भर्ती में ग्रेजुएट विषय के शिक्षक बनने का लाभ उठा रहे थे ,
उदाहरणार्थ
- किसी ने बी एस सी - गणित विषय ( गणित , भौतिकी , रसायन ) से किया और
बाद में पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट किसी और विषय - भौतिकी , रसायन ,आर्ट्स ,
पत्रकारिता, कंप्यूटर, प्रोफेशनल कोर्सेस आदि आदि से कर लिया
ऐसे
में सामान विषय में ग्रेजुएशन , पोस्ट ग्रेजुएशन करने वालों को नुक्सान हो
रहा था, और वे लोग कोर्ट गए , और उसकी याचिका की कार्यवाही इस प्रकार है ,
25 July 2013 ya iske baad kee karyvahee ka pata nahin chal paa raha hai
: -
(इस से पहले महिला जी जी आई सी एल टी ग्रेड भर्ती में ग्रेजुएट
, पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट विषय अलग अलग होने पर भी ग्रेजुएट विषय के टीचर बनने की
बहुत सारी बातें सामने आयी थी ,, भर्ती कई राउंड में चली थी , और पता नहीं
चला की भर्ती पूर्ण रूप से कम्प्लीट हुई की नहीं )
Important Point happens in Court is : -
even
in the case of Science subject if the requirement is of a bachelors
degree with Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics or Biology then in that
event a post graduation degree in Arts will not be a degree against
which quality point marks could be awarded under the Appendix - D.
for
example a candidate possessing a post graduate decree in Urdu against
the post of a subject in Science will be able to score higher quality
point marks thereby eliminating a candidate who actually belongs to the
same subject.
नोट: नयी एल टी ग्रेड शिक्षकों की भर्ती में पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट विषय के अतिरिक्त अंको को समाप्त कर दिया गया है
****************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6333 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ravindra Babu Shriwas And Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Radha Kant Ojha
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,J.H. Khan
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Ref: Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No. 113669 of 2013
Learned
counsel for the petitioners prays for and is allowed two weeks time to
file rejoinder-affidavit to the impleadment application.
List this
petition for admission before appropriate Court on 25.07.2013. When the
petition is listed next, the name of Sri Vasistha Tiwari will be shown
as one of the counsel for the respondents.
Order Date :- 11.7.2013
Sunil Kr Tiwari
***********
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6333 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ravindra Babu Shriwas And Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Radha Kant Ojha
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Sri
Upendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel states that a counter affidavit
as desired by this Court is under preparation in respect of other
reasons as well so as to provide complete information with regard to
status of selections.
Put up on Tuesday next.
Order Date :- 12.3.2013
Manish
http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2439902
****************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. 30
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 6333 of 2013
Ravindra Babu Shriwas & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
With
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 6835 of 2013
Gaurav Tiwari & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
With
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8847 of 2013
Ashutosh Sharma Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
With
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52188 of 2012
Km. Neelam Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
With
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34343 of 2011
Pratibha Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
With
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34698 of 2011
Smt. Madhuri Devi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
*****
Hon'ble A.P. Sahi,J.
These
batch of writ petitions relate to an issue that was earlier raised in
writ petition no. 34698 of 2011 and has again been raised in the other
writ petitions which has been noted in the order passed in writ petition
no. 6333 of 2013 on 8.2.2013. The dispute in short relates to the award
of quality point marks as against the possession of a post graduate
degree as per Rule 15(2) read with Appendix - D of the Uttar Pradesh,
Subordinate Educational Service Rules, 1983.
The rules read with
the appendix make a provision that a candidate has to be awarded quality
point marks in accordance with the calculation given in the said
appendix and if
a candidate possesses a post graduate decree for appointment against
Trained Graduate Teaching Post, then for first division marks fifteen
quality point marks will be awarded, for second division, ten quality
point marks will be awarded and for third division, five additional
marks will be awarded.
The
petitioners in all these writ petitions contend that this award of a
post graduate degree weightage should be in respect of the subject
concerned for which the selection is being made and not in any other
subject. For illustration, if the selection is being made of a science
teacher and he has subsequently obtained a post graduate degree in Arts
then the same should not be counted for the purpose of weightage.
The
learned Standing Counsel for the State had been granted time to file a
counter affidavit whereafter the learned Additional Advocate General,
Sri C.B. Yadav had appeared and had made a request that the matter be
adjourned to enable him to obtain instructions in the matter.
The Government Order obtained through the Director of Education on 4th of March, 2013 is as follows:-
^^QSDl@le;c)
la[;k&368 @15&2&2013
isz"kd]
jktsUnz izlkn]
la;qDr lfpo]
mRrj izns'k 'kkluA
lsok esa]
f'k{kk funs'kd ¼ek0½
mRrj izns'k] y[kuÅA
f'k{kk vuqHkkx&2 y[kuÅ fnukad 4 ekpZ] 2013
fo"k;&
fjV la[;k&6333@ 2013 Jh johUnz ckcw Jhokl o vU; ds laca/k esa ek0
U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 08-02-13 ds laca/k essa fnukad 05-03-13
dks izfr'kiFk&i= nkf[ky fd;s tkus laca/k esaA
egksn;]
mi;qZDr
fo"k;d vkids i= la[;k&fu;qfDr¼,y0Vh0½ @2343@ 2012&13] fnukad
01-03-13 ds lanHkZ esa eq>s ;g dgus dk funsZ'k gqvk gS fd jktdh;
ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa esa izf'kf{kr Lukrd osrudze ¼iq:"k 'kk[k½ dh HkrhZ
m0iz0 v/khuLFk f'k{kk ¼izf'kf{kr Lukrd Js.kh½ lsok fu;ekoyh 1983 ¼;Fkk
la'kksf/kr½ ¼izFke la'kks/ku½ lsok fu;ekoyh&1992 rFkk f}rh;
la'kks/ku lsok fu;ekoyh] 2010 rFkk vf/klwpuk
la[;k&05@15&2&27¼268½@ 2008 fnukad 03-01-2012 esa fufgr
fu;ekoyh ds vUrxZr fu;e& 8] 14 rFkk fu;e& 15¼2½ ds vUrxZr ,oa
ifjf'k"V&Mh ds vk/kkj ij vH;fFkZ;ksa ds p;u dh izfdz;k lEikfnr dh
xbZ gSA fu;e& 15¼2½ ds vUrxZr ifjf'k"V&Mh esa fufgr fu;ekoyh esa
LukrdksRrj mikf/k/kkjdksa dks dze'k% izFke Js.kh esa 15] f}rh; Js.kh
esa 10 rFkk r`rh; Js.kh esa 05 vad fn;s tkus dh O;oLFkk fo|eku gSA
vr%
mDr O;oLFkk ds vUrxZr ek0 mPp U;k;ky; dh vis{kkuqlkj fLFkfr Li"V djrs
gq, izfr'kiFk&i= nkf[ky fd;s tkus dh dk;Zokgh lqfuf'pr djus dk d"V
djsaA
¼jktsUnz izlkn½
la;qDr lfpo^^
Sri C.B. Yadav
however inspite of these instructions which clearly indicate that the
selections are being held as per Rules contends that if the argument of
the petitioners is accepted then the court can proceed to correlate the
possession of the post graduation degree to the subjects which have been
mentioned in the qualification at the graduation level to be possessed
by the candidate.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have not
been able to counter this position taken by Sri C.B. Yadav and to the
mind of the court the same also appears to be reasonable that the post
graduation degree should be correlated to any of the subjects of the
candidate for the post in question at the bachelors level, for example,
if the requirement at the graduate level is of a bachelors degree in
History, Geography, Political Science or Economics for the post of an
Assistant Teacher General (History, Geography, Civics, Economics) then
the post graduation degree should relate to any of the said four
subjects.
***************
Similarly,
even in the case of Science subject if the requirement is of a
bachelors degree with Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics or Biology then in
that event a post graduation degree in Arts will not be a degree
against which quality point marks could be awarded under the Appendix - D.
************
This
being the position, the matter could have been disposed of with the
aforesaid interpretation in relation to the possession of a post
graduation degree for the purpose of quality point marks as per Rule 15,
but
in the meantime during the pendency of these writ petitions, it is
informed that some selections have been finalized and candidates have
joined on the basis of the selections held. At this juncture it may be
relevant to point out that even with regard to previous years selection
the order passed by the Court was clearly to the effect that any selections made shall be subject to the result of the writ petition against the advertisement then issued.
In
the instant cases of the year 2013 a similar order has been passed on
8.2.2013. Accordingly, it would be appropriate that the State files an
affidavit indicating as to the results which have been declared and
appointments were made prior to passing of the interim order dated
8.2.2013 alongwith the names of the candidates alongwith their place of
posting. It is further provided that the said affidavit shall be filed
within a week.
The
respondents shall in the light of what has been stated above shall now
not proceed to issue any letter of appointment to a candidate who has
been extended the benefit of quality point marks on the basis of a post
graduate degree other than the subjects at the graduate level until
further orders of the court.
Put up on Tuesday next.
A
copy of the order may be given to the learned Standing Counsel, Sri
Upendra Singh free of charges for communicating it to the authority
within 24 hours.
Order date: 5.3.2013
Sahu
Source : http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2419133
*************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6333 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ravindra Babu Shriwas And Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Radha Kant Ojha
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard
Sri R.K. Ojha, learned counsel, for the petitioners and Sri C.B. Yadav,
learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Upendra Singh,
learned Standing Counsel, for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Sri Yadav
prays that he will be obtaining his instruction in the matter as this
issue has been raised in a large number of petitions and shall be
assisting the Court on the legal issues as framed in the order passed in
the present writ petition.
He prays that the matter be taken up on Tuesday.
As prayed, put up on Tuesday.
Order Date :- 27.2.2013
Manish
http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2408463
***************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6333 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ravindra Babu Shriwas And Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Radha Kant Ojha
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners.
This
writ petition raises an issue on the ground of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India whereby the petitioners contend that the criteria
for awarding additional marks against the possession of a post graduate
decree is irrational, inasmuch as, the selections are being held in
particular subjects and therefore the award of marks in the post
graduate decree should have a nexus with the subject in which the
selections are being made. In short the weightage should be extended
provided the post-graduate decree is in the subject concerned.
Sri
Ojha submits that the criteria adopted violates Article 14, and as an
illustration, Sri Ojha submits that a candidate being a graduate in
Science applying against the post of Science, may be having the best
qualifications in his subject, but he is likely to be superseded by a
lesser meritorious candidate in the event such a candidate has a post
graduate decree in a different subject. He therefore submits that for
example a candidate possessing a post graduate decree in Urdu against
the post of a subject in Science will be able to score higher quality
point marks thereby eliminating a candidate who actually belongs to the
same subject. The weightage therefore has to relate to the subject for which the post is advertised.
The
matter does require scrutiny, inasmuch as, earlier also, writ petition
no. 34698 of 2011 was filed in which this Court had called upon the
respondent State to file a counter affidavit. A copy of the counter
affidavit filed therein, has been placed before the Court but the same
does not answer the aforesaid issue at all.
In the aforesaid
circumstances, list this writ petition alongwith the connected writ
petitions including writ petition no. 34698 of 2011 on 27th of February,
2013 by which time the respondent State shall also file a counter
affidavit in the present writ petition as well and answer the issue
raised and referred to hereinabove as well.
The selections that are
proposed to be held on the basis of the said criteria shall abide by the
final outcome of the writ petition. All the connected writ petitions
would also be governed by this order.
Order Date :- 8.2.2013
Sahu
http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2367049
************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6333 of 2013
Petitioner :- Ravindra Babu Shriwas And Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Radha Kant Ojha
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Put up on Friday i.e. on 8.2.2013 alongwith the records of Writ Petition No. 52188 of 2012 and 24698 of 2011.
Order Date :- 5.2.2013
Sahu
http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do?judgmentID=2359948
