SUPREME COURT K ORDER AA GAYA HAI
ABHEE SOCIAL MEDIA SE COPY PASTE.
BAAD MEIN AAPKI LINK BHEE DETE HAI
KOEE MALE FEMALE RESERVATION KHATAM NAHIN HUA HAI.
SC MEIN AISEE KOEE BAAT NAHIN HAI.
SIRF EK NISCHIT CUT OFF SE OOPAR KE LOGO KO PEHLE NIYUKTI MIL JAYEGEE
RAJYA SARKAR KI NIYUKTI NA DE PAANE MEIN HUEE NAKAMEE KO SUPREME COURT NE UJAGAR KARTE HUE AB 70% GEN
AUR 65% MARKS PAANE VAALE RESERVED CAT KE SABHEE LOGO KO 6 HAFTE MEIN NIYUKTI KAA AADESH DE DIYAA HAI.
3 LAKH POST
KHALEE HONE KEE BAAT SARKAREE WAKEEL KE BATANE AUR YOGYA SHIKSKON KI
KAMEE KO VA RTE IMPLEMENATION MEIN HUEE NAKAMEE KO DEKHTE NAYA ORDER
DIYA GAYAA HAI.
SUPREME COURT KA RUKH SAKHT NAJAR AA RAHA HAI
फिलहाल
सामान्य वर्ग की मेरिट 115 तक गयी थी , और अब सुप्रीम कोर्ट के आदेश के
बाद टेट मेरिट 105 वालों तक नियुक्ति 6 हफ्ते में देनी होगी ।
आरक्षित वर्ग को 65 प्रतिशत टेट मार्क्स (97 या 98 मार्क्स ) तक नियुक्ति देनी होगी ।
इसको देखते हुए लगभग डेढ़ लाख टेट पास धारियों को 6 हफ्ते में नियुक्ति देनी होगी ।
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने तो इतनी बड़ी नियुक्ति का पिटारा खोल कर इतिहास कायम कर दिया ।
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने साथ ही साथ कहा है की सुप्रीम कोर्ट के आज्ञा के पालन की रिपोर्ट राज्य सरकार के सक्षम अधिकारी प्रस्तुत करें ,
अन्यथा कानूनानुसार उन्हें दण्डित किया जाएगा
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने प्राचीन काल में कौटिल्य द्वारा कहे गए कथन को बताया -
कौटिल्य के अनुसार जो माता पिता अपने बच्चों को शिक्षा ग्रहण करने स्कूल नहीं भेजते , उन्हें दण्डित किया जाना चाहिए
राज्य
सरकार के वकील ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट को 3 लाख पद खाली होने की बात बताई थी और
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने बच्चों की शिक्षा पर चिंता जाहिर करते हुए , पहले
योग्य टेट पास अभ्यर्थीयों को 6 हफ्ते में भर्ती का आदेश दे दिया ।
लोगों में चर्चा चल रही है की सुप्रीम कोर्ट कहीं अगली सुनवाई में और बड़ी भर्ती का आदेश न दे दे ,
चारों और सुप्रीम कोर्ट का गुणगान चल रहा है ।
दुसरी तरफ खुद राज्य सरकार द्वारा जूनियर शिक्षकों की 30 हज़ार भर्तियों न हो पाने पर अनशन चल रहा है ।
कई
लोग टेट मेरिट को मायावती की देन बताते हुए उनका भी गुणगान कर रहे हैं
हालाँकि टेट मेरिट से भर्ती फंसने के बाद उन्होंने क्या सहायता की , इसके
बारे में ज्यादा नहीं पता ।
ज्यादातर राजनीतिक पार्टियां वोट बैंक के
चक्कर में टेट मेरिट से भर्ती पर मोन ही दिखाई दीं , ऐसा ही ज्यादातर
मीडिया भी उनको कोसता रहा ।
अभ्यर्थी अपनी भर्ती के प्रति स्वयं लड़े , और आखिरी चोखट सुप्रीम कोर्ट तक फाइट की
सुप्रीम कोर्ट का ऑर्डर आ गया है , और राज्य सरकार का सकारात्मक रुख भी जल्द ही आ जाएगा
/+ye lo order aa gaya ......................
CA 4347-4375/14
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.6 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Nos.4347-4375 of 2014
STATE OF U.P & ORS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SHIV KUMAR PATHAK & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for intervention and office report)
WITH S.L.P.(C) No.62/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1672/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1674/2014
(With office report)
C.A. No.4376/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C)...CC No.10408/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11671/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11673/2014
(With office report)
Date : 17/12/2014 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Appellant(s) Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR
Mrs. Manju Aggarwal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Yeshraj Bundela, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv.
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2014.12.18
16:46:36 IST
Reason: Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Adv.
CA 4347-4375/14
2
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. B.P. Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Mr. Shakti Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Dr. Kailash Chand, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S.G.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Amritanshu, Adv.
Mr. Suryodaya Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv.
Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Kr. Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Singh, AOR
Mr. P.P. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, AOR
For NCTE Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
Ms. Geeta Singh, Adv.
Mr. Alok Gupta, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
CA 4347-4375/14
3
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. M. P. Jha, AOR
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashish Singh, Adv.
Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Manohar Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Swaroop, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Mr. Vipul Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
SLP 62/14 Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR
Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shreepal Singh, Adv.
Mr. V.D. Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Hearing resumed.
In
course of hearing, we have thought it appropriate to pass an interim
order by which the vacancies can be filled up and the academic climate
in the State of Uttar Pradesh shall not suffer an unnecessary winter.
CA 4347-4375/14
4
Be it noted, this Court on 25th March, 2014, had passed the following order:
"Leave granted.
Hearing expedited.
By this interim order,
we
direct the State of Uttar Pradesh to fill up the vacancies of Assistant
Teachers in the schools pursuant to the advertisement issued on
30.11.2011 as per the directions issued by the
Division Bench of Allahabad High Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Pathak
& Ors. [Special Appeal (Defective) No.237 of 2013] and connected
matters as expeditiously as possible at any rate within 12 weeks' time
from today.
Further, the State in the letter of
appointment that will be issued to the successful candidates shall
mention that their appointment is subject to the result of the civil
appeals that are pending before this Court.
The
appointee(s) shall not claim any equities at the time of final disposal
of the civil appeals. All actions/proceedings of the State Government
will be subject to the final result of these civil appeals."
Despite the
aforesaid order, the State has not carried out the appointment process.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length on various occasions,
we
are inclined to modify the order passed on 25th March, 2014, and direct
that the State Government shall appoint the candidates, whose names
have not been weeded out in the malpractice and who have obtained/secured seventy percent marks in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). The
candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/Other Backward
Classes and the physically handicapped persons, shall be appointed if
they have obtained/secured sixty-five percent marks. If
there is any policy of the State Government covering any other category
for the purpose of reservation, it may be given effect to with the same
percentage. It shall be mentioned in the appointment letter that their
appointment shall be subject to the result of these appeals and they
shall not claim any equity because of
the appointment, for it is
issued on the basis of the direction passed by this Court. The letters
of appointment shall be issued within a period of six weeks.
At
this juncture, we must state that the advertisement was issued to fill
up 72,825 vacancies in the post of Assistant Teachers, who have to
impart education to students of Classes I to V. We have been apprised by
the
learned counsel for the respondents that there are three lacs posts lying vacant as on today.
In this context, we must recapitulate the objects and reasons from the
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which read
as follows:
"The crucial role of universal elementary
education
for strengthening the social fabric of democracy through provision of
equal opportunities to all has been accepted since inception of our
Republic. The Directive
Principles of State Policy enumerated in our
Constitution lays down that the State shall
provide
free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen
years. Over the years there has been significant spatial and numerical
expansion of elementary schools in the country, yet the goal of
universal elementary education continues to elude us.
The number of children, particularly children
from disadvantaged groups and weaker sections, who drop out of school before completing
elementary education, remains very large.
Moreover, the quality of learning achievement
is not always entirely satisfactory even in the case of children who complete elementary education.
2. Article 21A, as inserted by the
Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act,
2002, provides for free and compulsory
education of all children in the age group of
six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in
such manner as the State may, by law,
determine.
3. Consequently, the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008, is
CA 4347-4375/14
7
proposed to be enacted which seeks to provide,-
(a) that every child has a right to be provided
full time elementary education of satisfactory
and equitable quality in a formal school which
satisfied certain essential norms and
standards;
(b) 'compulsory education' casts an obligation
on the appropriate Government to provide and
ensure admission, attendance and completion of
elementary education;
(c) 'free education' means that no child, other
than a child who has been admitted by his or
her parents to a school which is not supported
by the appropriate Government, shall be liable
to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses
which may prevent him or her from pursuing and
completing elementary education;
(d) the duties and responsibilities of the
appropriate Governments, local authorities,
parents, schools and teachers in providing free
and compulsory education; and
(e) a system for protection of the right of
children and a decentralized grievance
redressal mechanism.
4. The proposed legislation is anchored in the
belief that the values of equality, social
justice and democracy and the creation of a
just and humane society can be achieved only
through provision of inclusive elementary
CA 4347-4375/14
8
education to all. Provision of free and
compulsory education of satisfactory quality to
children from disadvantaged and weaker sections
is, therefore, not merely the responsibility of
schools run or supported by the appropriate
Governments, but also of schools which are not
dependent on Government FUNDS."
Primary education can be equated to the primary
health of a child. When a child is educated, the Nation
marches towards civilization. No student can inculcate or
cultivate education without guidance. Definitely not a
child, who is supposed to get primary guidance from a
teacher, for him he is like a laser beam. The State, as the
guardian of all citizens and also with a further enhanced and
accentuated responsibilities for the children, has a
sacrosanct obligation to see that the children are educated.
Almost two thousand years back, Kautaliya had stated that the
parents who do not send their children to have the teachings,
deserves to be punished. Similar was the climate in England
almost seven centuries back. Thus, the significance of
education can be well recognized. In such a situation, we
cannot conceive that the posts would lie vacant, students go
untaught and the schools look like barren in a desert waiting
for an oasis. The teacher shall serve the purpose of oasis
in the field of education. Hence, the aforesaid directions.
CA 4347-4375/14
9
The competent authority shall file a compliance
report, failing which they shall face the consequences as the
law provides and the law does not countenance disobedience of
the law and orders of the court.
Let the matter be listed on 25th February, 2015, for
further hearing.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
SUPREME COURT K ORDER AA GAYA HAI
ABHEE SOCIAL MEDIA SE COPY PASTE.
BAAD MEIN AAPKI LINK BHEE DETE HAI
RAJYA SARKAR KI NIYUKTI NA DE PAANE MEIN HUEE NAKAMEE KO SUPREME COURT NE UJAGAR KARTE HUE AB 70% GEN
AUR 65% MARKS PAANE VAALE RESERVED CAT KE SABHEE LOGO KO 6 HAFTE MEIN NIYUKTI KAA AADESH DE DIYAA HAI.
3 LAKH POST
KHALEE HONE KEE BAAT SARKAREE WAKEEL KE BATANE AUR YOGYA SHIKSKON KI
KAMEE KO VA RTE IMPLEMENATION MEIN HUEE NAKAMEE KO DEKHTE NAYA ORDER
DIYA GAYAA HAI.
SUPREME COURT KA RUKH SAKHT NAJAR AA RAHA HAI
ye lo order aa gaya ......................
CA 4347-4375/14
1
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.6 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Nos.4347-4375 of 2014
STATE OF U.P & ORS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SHIV KUMAR PATHAK & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for intervention and office report)
WITH S.L.P.(C) No.62/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1672/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1674/2014
(With office report)
C.A. No.4376/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C)...CC No.10408/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11671/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11673/2014
(With office report)
Date : 17/12/2014 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Appellant(s) Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR
Mrs. Manju Aggarwal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Yeshraj Bundela, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv.
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2014.12.18
16:46:36 IST
Reason: Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Adv.
CA 4347-4375/14
2
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. B.P. Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Mr. Shakti Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Dr. Kailash Chand, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S.G.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Amritanshu, Adv.
Mr. Suryodaya Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv.
Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Kr. Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Singh, AOR
Mr. P.P. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, AOR
For NCTE Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
Ms. Geeta Singh, Adv.
Mr. Alok Gupta, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
CA 4347-4375/14
3
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. M. P. Jha, AOR
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashish Singh, Adv.
Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Manohar Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Swaroop, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Mr. Vipul Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
SLP 62/14 Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR
Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shreepal Singh, Adv.
Mr. V.D. Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Hearing resumed.
In
course of hearing, we have thought it appropriate to pass an interim
order by which the vacancies can be filled up and the academic climate
in the State of Uttar Pradesh shall not suffer an unnecessary winter.
CA 4347-4375/14
4
Be it noted, this Court on 25th March, 2014, had passed the following order:
"Leave granted.
Hearing expedited.
By this interim order, we direct the State of
Uttar Pradesh to fill up the vacancies of
Assistant
Teachers in the schools pursuant to the advertisement issued on
30.11.2011 as per the directions issued by the Division Bench of
Allahabad High Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Pathak & Ors.
[Special Appeal (Defective) No.237 of 2013] and connected matters as
expeditiously as possible at any rate within 12 weeks' time from today.
Further,
the State in the letter of appointment that will be issued to the
successful candidates shall mention that their appointment is subject to
the result of the civil appeals that are pending before this Court.
The
appointee(s) shall not claim any equities at the time of final disposal
of the civil appeals. All actions/proceedings of the State Government
will be subject to the final result of these civil appeals."
Despite the aforesaid order,
the State has not carried out the appointment process. After hearing
the learned counsel for the parties at length on various
CA 4347-4375/14
5
occasions, we are inclined to modify the order passed on 25th March, 2014, and direct that the State Government shall
appoint the candidates, whose names have not been weeded out in the malpractice and who
have obtained/secured seventy percent marks in the Teacher Eligibility
Test (TET). The candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled
Tribe/Other Backward Classes and the physically handicapped
persons, shall be appointed if they have obtained/secured sixty-five percent marks. If
there is any policy of the State Government covering any other category
for the purpose of reservation, it may be given effect to with the same
percentage. It shall be mentioned in the appointment letter that their
appointment shall be subject to the result of these appeals and they
shall not claim any equity because of
the appointment, for it is
issued on the basis of the direction passed by this Court. The letters
of appointment shall be issued within a period of six weeks.
At
this juncture, we must state that the advertisement was issued to fill
up 72,825 vacancies in the post of Assistant Teachers, who have to
impart education to students of Classes I to V. We have been apprised by
the
learned counsel for the respondents that there are three lacs
posts lying vacant as on today. In this context, we must recapitulate
the objects and reasons from the Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which
CA 4347-4375/14
6
read as follows:
"The crucial role of universal elementary
education
for strengthening the social fabric of democracy through provision of
equal opportunities to all has been accepted since inception of our
Republic. The Directive Principles of State Policy enumerated in our
Constitution lays down that the State shall provide
free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen
years. Over the years there has been significant spatial and numerical
expansion of elementary schools in the country, yet the goal of
universal elementary education continues to elude us. The number of
children, particularly children from disadvantaged groups and weaker
sections, who drop out of school before completing elementary education,
remains very large.
Moreover, the quality of learning achievement
is not always entirely satisfactory even in the case of children who
complete elementary education.
2. Article 21A, as
inserted by the Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002,
provides for free and compulsory education of all children in the age
group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in such manner as
the State may, by law, determine.
3. Consequently, the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008, is
proposed to be enacted which seeks to provide,-
(a) that every child has a right to be provided full time elementary education of satisfactory
and equitable quality in a formal school which satisfied certain essential norms and
standards;
(b) 'compulsory education' casts an obligation on the appropriate Government to provide and
ensure admission, attendance and completion of elementary education;
(c) 'free education' means that no child, other than a child who has been admitted by his or
her parents to a school which is not supported by the appropriate Government, shall be liable
to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and
completing elementary education;
(d)
the duties and responsibilities of the appropriate Governments, local
authorities, parents, schools and teachers in providing free and
compulsory education; and
(e) a system for protection of the right of children and a decentralized grievance redressal mechanism.
4.
The proposed legislation is anchored in the belief that the values of
equality, social justice and democracy and the creation of a just and
humane society can be achieved only through provision of inclusive
elementaryeducation to all. Provision of free and compulsory education
of satisfactory quality to children from disadvantaged and weaker
sections is, therefore, not merely the responsibility of schools run or
supported by the appropriate Governments, but also of schools which are
not
dependent on Government FUNDS."
Primary
education can be equated to the primary health of a child. When a child
is educated, the Nation marches towards civilization. No student can
inculcate or cultivate education without guidance. Definitely not a
child, who is supposed to get primary guidance from a teacher, for him
he is like a laser beam. The State, as the guardian of all citizens and
also with a further enhanced and
accentuated responsibilities for the children, has a sacrosanct obligation to see that the children are educated.
Almost
two thousand years back, Kautaliya had stated that the parents who do
not send their children to have the teachings,deserves to be punished.
Similar was the climate in England almost seven centuries back. Thus, the significance of
education
can be well recognized. In such a situation, we cannot conceive that
the posts would lie vacant, students gountaught and the schools look
like barren in a desert waiting for an oasis. The teacher shall serve
the purpose of oasis in the field of education. Hence, the aforesaid
directions.
The
competent authority shall file a compliance report, failing which they
shall face the consequences as the law provides and the law does not
countenance disobedience of the law and orders of the court.
Let the matter be listed on 25th February, 2015, for further hearing.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
SUPREME COURT K ORDER AA GAYA HAI
ABHEE SOCIAL MEDIA SE COPY PASTE.
BAAD MEIN AAPKI LINK BHEE DETE HAI
RAJYA SARKAR KI NIYUKTI NA DE PAANE MEIN HUEE NAKAMEE KO SUPREME COURT NE UJAGAR KARTE HUE AB 70% GEN
AUR 65% MARKS PAANE VAALE RESERVED CAT KE SABHEE LOGO KO 6 HAFTE MEIN NIYUKTI KAA AADESH DE DIYAA HAI.
3 LAKH POST
KHALEE HONE KEE BAAT SARKAREE WAKEEL KE BATANE AUR YOGYA SHIKSKON KI
KAMEE KO VA RTE IMPLEMENATION MEIN HUEE NAKAMEE KO DEKHTE NAYA ORDER
DIYA GAYAA HAI.
SUPREME COURT KA RUKH SAKHT NAJAR AA RAHA HAI
ye lo order aa gaya ......................
CA 4347-4375/14
1
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.6 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Nos.4347-4375 of 2014
STATE OF U.P & ORS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SHIV KUMAR PATHAK & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for intervention and office report)
WITH S.L.P.(C) No.62/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1672/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1674/2014
(With office report)
C.A. No.4376/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C)...CC No.10408/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11671/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11673/2014
(With office report)
Date : 17/12/2014 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Appellant(s) Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR
Mrs. Manju Aggarwal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Yeshraj Bundela, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv.
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2014.12.18
16:46:36 IST
Reason: Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Adv.
CA 4347-4375/14
2
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. B.P. Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Mr. Shakti Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Dr. Kailash Chand, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S.G.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Amritanshu, Adv.
Mr. Suryodaya Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv.
Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Kr. Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Singh, AOR
Mr. P.P. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, AOR
For NCTE Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
Ms. Geeta Singh, Adv.
Mr. Alok Gupta, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
CA 4347-4375/14
3
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. M. P. Jha, AOR
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashish Singh, Adv.
Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Manohar Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Swaroop, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Mr. Vipul Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
SLP 62/14 Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR
Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shreepal Singh, Adv.
Mr. V.D. Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Hearing resumed.
In
course of hearing, we have thought it appropriate to pass an interim
order by which the vacancies can be filled up and the academic climate
in the State of Uttar Pradesh shall not suffer an unnecessary winter.
CA 4347-4375/14
4
Be it noted, this Court on 25th March, 2014, had passed the following order:
"Leave granted.
Hearing expedited.
By this interim order, we direct the State of
Uttar Pradesh to fill up the vacancies of
Assistant
Teachers in the schools pursuant to the advertisement issued on
30.11.2011 as per the directions issued by the Division Bench of
Allahabad High Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Pathak & Ors.
[Special Appeal (Defective) No.237 of 2013] and connected matters as
expeditiously as possible at any rate within 12 weeks' time from today.
Further,
the State in the letter of appointment that will be issued to the
successful candidates shall mention that their appointment is subject to
the result of the civil appeals that are pending before this Court.
The
appointee(s) shall not claim any equities at the time of final disposal
of the civil appeals. All actions/proceedings of the State Government
will be subject to the final result of these civil appeals."
Despite the aforesaid order,
the State has not carried out the appointment process. After hearing
the learned counsel for the parties at length on various
CA 4347-4375/14
5
occasions, we are inclined to modify the order passed on 25th March, 2014, and direct that the State Government shall
appoint the candidates, whose names have not been weeded out in the malpractice and who
have obtained/secured seventy percent marks in the Teacher Eligibility
Test (TET). The candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled
Tribe/Other Backward Classes and the physically handicapped persons,
shall be appointed if they have obtained/secured sixty-five percent
marks. If
there is any policy of the State Government covering any other category
for the purpose of reservation, it may be given effect to with the same
percentage. It shall be mentioned in the appointment letter that their
appointment shall be subject to the result of these appeals and they
shall not claim any equity because of
the appointment, for it is
issued on the basis of the direction passed by this Court. The letters
of appointment shall be issued within a period of six weeks.
At
this juncture, we must state that the advertisement was issued to fill
up 72,825 vacancies in the post of Assistant Teachers, who have to
impart education to students of Classes I to V. We have been apprised by
the
learned counsel for the respondents that there are three lacs
posts lying vacant as on today. In this context, we must recapitulate
the objects and reasons from the Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which
CA 4347-4375/14
6
read as follows:
"The crucial role of universal elementary
education
for strengthening the social fabric of democracy through provision of
equal opportunities to all has been accepted since inception of our
Republic. The Directive
Principles of State Policy enumerated in our
Constitution lays down that the State shall
provide
free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen
years. Over the years there has been significant spatial and numerical
expansion of elementary schools in the country, yet the goal of
universal elementary education continues to elude us.
The number of children, particularly children
from disadvantaged groups and weaker sections, who drop out of school before completing
elementary education, remains very large.
Moreover, the quality of learning achievement
is not always entirely satisfactory even in the case of children who complete elementary education.
2. Article 21A, as inserted by the
Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act,
2002, provides for free and compulsory
education of all children in the age group of
six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in
such manner as the State may, by law,
determine.
3. Consequently, the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008, is
CA 4347-4375/14
7
proposed to be enacted which seeks to provide,-
(a) that every child has a right to be provided
full time elementary education of satisfactory
and equitable quality in a formal school which
satisfied certain essential norms and
standards;
(b) 'compulsory education' casts an obligation
on the appropriate Government to provide and
ensure admission, attendance and completion of
elementary education;
(c) 'free education' means that no child, other
than a child who has been admitted by his or
her parents to a school which is not supported
by the appropriate Government, shall be liable
to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses
which may prevent him or her from pursuing and
completing elementary education;
(d) the duties and responsibilities of the
appropriate Governments, local authorities,
parents, schools and teachers in providing free
and compulsory education; and
(e) a system for protection of the right of
children and a decentralized grievance
redressal mechanism.
4. The proposed legislation is anchored in the
belief that the values of equality, social
justice and democracy and the creation of a
just and humane society can be achieved only
through provision of inclusive elementary
CA 4347-4375/14
8
education to all. Provision of free and
compulsory education of satisfactory quality to
children from disadvantaged and weaker sections
is, therefore, not merely the responsibility of
schools run or supported by the appropriate
Governments, but also of schools which are not
dependent on Government FUNDS."
Primary education can be equated to the primary
health of a child. When a child is educated, the Nation
marches towards civilization. No student can inculcate or
cultivate education without guidance. Definitely not a
child, who is supposed to get primary guidance from a
teacher, for him he is like a laser beam. The State, as the
guardian of all citizens and also with a further enhanced and
accentuated responsibilities for the children, has a
sacrosanct obligation to see that the children are educated.
Almost two thousand years back, Kautaliya had stated that the
parents who do not send their children to have the teachings,
deserves to be punished. Similar was the climate in England
almost seven centuries back. Thus, the significance of
education can be well recognized. In such a situation, we
cannot conceive that the posts would lie vacant, students go
untaught and the schools look like barren in a desert waiting
for an oasis. The teacher shall serve the purpose of oasis
in the field of education. Hence, the aforesaid directions.
CA 4347-4375/14
9
The competent authority shall file a compliance
report, failing which they shall face the consequences as the
law provides and the law does not countenance disobedience of
the law and orders of the court.
Let the matter be listed on 25th February, 2015, for
further hearing.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
