Join Uttar Pradesh Teacher Eligibility Test UPTET News

Saturday, August 18, 2018

मेल टीचर्स को इंटर डिस्ट्रिक्ट ट्रांसफर / मयूचल ट्रांसफर का लाभ नहीं , कोर्ट

मेल टीचर्स को इंटर डिस्ट्रिक्ट ट्रांसफर / मयूचल ट्रांसफर का लाभ नहीं , कोर्ट

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 7

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17394 of 2018

Petitioner :- Mohd. Javed
Respondent :- U.P. Basic Education Board Allahabad And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashwini Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shivam Yadav

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Petitioner is a male assistant teacher in Primary School in Dharmpur Vikas Khand Sakaran District Sitapur. He wants his transfer from Sitapur to Meerut.
Similar controversy in the matter of a male teacher came up for consideration before this Court in Writ-A No.16178 of 2018 (Lalit Mohan Bhardwaj Vs. State of U.P. and 4 others) which was dismissed by order dated 30.07.2018, as under:
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for the following relief:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for issuance of necessary direction to the respondent No.3, the Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad at Allahabad to pass an appropriate order for consideration the grievance of petitioner as per Rule 8(2)(F) of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules 2008, as amended Rule 2010, as well as Rule 21 of the Rules U.P. Basic Education (Teachers Services ) Rules, 1981.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for issuance of necessary direction to the respondent No.3, the Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad at Allahabad to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 25.5.2018 (Annexure No.4)".
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application of the petitioner for transfer from District - Lakhimpur Khiri to District - Shamli, may be considered in terms of Rule 8(2)(d) of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules, 2008. Rule 8(2) of the Rules, provides as under:
"8. Posting. - (2)(a) The newly appointed male teachers shall initially be posted compulsorily in backward area for a period of at least five years.
(b) Newly appointed female teachers shall also be compulsorily posted in backward area for a period of at least two years.
(c) Mutual transfers within the district from general block of backward block and vice-versa would be permitted with the condition that the teacher on mutual transfer to a backward block shall have to serve in that block compulsorily for five years. Mutual transfers would be permitted only in case of those teachers who have more than remaining five year's service.
(d) In normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teachers will not be entertained within five years of their posting. But under special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfers in respect of female teachers would be entertained to the place of residence of their husband or in law's district.
(e) If by virtue of posting of newly appointed or promoted teachers the primary and upper primary schools of backward blocks get saturated i.e., no post of teacher is vacant in these schools, then handicapped and female teachers on their choice can be adjusted against the vacant posts of general blocks from these saturated blocks.
(f) Mutual transfers of male/female teachers from one backward blocks to another can be considered.
(3) Teachers transferred from one district to another will be given posting as per the provisions of these rules."
The petitioner is a male Assistant Teacher who was appointed by appointment letter dated 14.11.2015, in Primary School Imaliya, Block Esanagar, District - Lakhimpur Khiri. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that his initial appointment as aforementioned was made in a backward area. Clause (a) of sub-Rule 2 of Rule 8 specifically provides that the newly appointed male teacher shall initially be posted compulsorily in backward areas for a period of at least 5 years. The petitioner has not yet served in the aforesaid backward area for minimum period of 5 years. Clause (c) of sub-Rule 2 of Rule 8 provides for mutual transfer within the District, which is not applicable to the case of the petitioner. Clause (d) of sub-Rule 2 of Rule 8 specifically provides that in normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teacher will not be entertained within five years of their posting. An exception has been carved out for female teachers that in special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfer in respect of female teachers would be entertained for transfer to the place of residence of their husband or in-laws Districts. The petitioner is a male teacher. Therefore, the exception carved out in Clause (d) of sub-Rule 2 of Rule 8 is not applicable to the petitioner. Clause (f) of sub-Rule 2 of Rule 8 provides that mutual transfers of male/female teachers from one backward blocks to another can be considered. The relief sought by the petitioner in the present writ petition is not for his mutual transfer from one block to another. The petitioner wants his transfer to another District. Therefore Clause (f) is also not applicable in the matter of the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed."

Respectfully, following law laid down in the case of Lalit Mohan Bhardwaj (supra), this writ petition is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.8.2018
NLY

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

UPTET News -TET 2 की वजह से प्रमोशन पर रोक हटाने के लिए याचिका खारिज, 15 मई के निर्णय के तहत स्टे जारी

UPTET  News -TET 2 की वजह से प्रमोशन पर रोक हटाने के लिए याचिका खारिज, 15 मई के निर्णय के तहत स्टे जारी

याचियों का कहना था कि पर्याप्त संख्या में टेट पास उम्मीदवार न होने पर सरकार को टेट योग्यता में छूट देने का अधिकार है, कोर्ट ने उनके तर्क को खारिज करते हुए कड़ाई से फुलबेंच के निर्णय शिव कुमार - मिनिमम टेट योग्यता NCTE का पालन करने को कहा,
साथ ही राज्य सरकार को कहा कि प्रमोशन में अकेले 1981 नियमावली का ही पालन न करें।

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 7

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16523 of 2018

Petitioner :- Subedar Yadav And 54 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arpan Srivastava,Sri Anil Bhushan Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Prakash Shukla

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
It appears that a process for promotion of teachers was undertaken by the Basic Education Department in which teachers who do not possess even T.E.T. certificates, were being considered. A Writ-A No.11287 of 2018 (Deepak Sharma and 3 others vs. State of U.P. and 16 others) was filed which was disposed of by order dated 15.05.2018, as under:
"This petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:
"i) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to limit consideration of candidates for promotion as Headmaster of Junior Basic School and Assistant Teacher / Headmaster of Senior Basic School to candidates possessing TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level) alone in pursuance to promotional exercise underway in pursuance to circular of Secretary, Board of Basic Education, U.P., Allahabad dated 28.03.2018.
ii) a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents not to accord any consideration for promotion as Headmaster - Junior Basic School and Assistant Teacher / Head Master, Senior Basic School of candidates not possessing TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level)."
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon clause 4 of the notification dated 12.11.2014 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (in short, 'NCTE'), which reads as under:
"4. Qualification for Recruitment:-
(a) The qualifications for recruitment of teachers in any recognized school imparting Pre-primary, Primary, Upper Primary, Secondary, Senior Secondary or Intermediate Schools or Colleges imparting senior secondary education shall be as given in the First and Second Schedule(s) annexed to these Regulations.�
(b) For promotion of teachers the relevant minimum qualifications as specified in the First and Second Schedule(s) are applicable for consideration from one level to the next level."
Submission is that for the purposes of promotion to the post of Headmaster / Headmistress as well as to the post of Assistant Teacher, the requirement of obtaining certificates of TET (Primary level) / TET (Upper primary level) would be mandatory. It is contended that the respondents cannot enlarge the zone of consideration while considering the claim of promotion, even to those who do not possess the aforesaid qualification.
While entertaining this petition, the petitioners were permitted to implead NCTE as a party - respondent and its counsel was allowed time to obtain instructions in that regard. Following orders were passed in the matter on 08.05.2018:
"Petitioners contend that by virtue of regulation 4(b) of the NCTE Notification dated 12.11.2014, the qualification for promotion is also prescribed. Contention is that the qualification prescribed in the first and second schedule to the notification would equally apply for direct recruitment and promotion. It is also stated that section 23 of the Act of 2009 talks of appointment which includes promotion also.
Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the NCTE seeks short indulgence in order to obtain specific instruction from NCTE in that regard.
Put up as fresh on 15.5.2018."
Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel representing respondent - NCTE, on the basis of the instructions, states that the requirement contained in clause 4(b) of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014 would have to be met by a candidate before he is considered for promotion to the post of Headmaster / Headmistress of junior basic school and Assistant Teacher / Headmaster of senior basic school.�
Shri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel representing the respondent no. 3 as well as District Basic Education Officer, initially, tried to raise an objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition at the instance of the present petitioners on the ground that they do not possess requisite eligibility for promotion to the posts in question and therefore, the writ petition, at their instance, be not entertained.
However, in view of the averments made in paragraph no. 10 of the writ petition as well as in view of proviso to rule 8(3), the objection of the respondents is not liable to be sustained; in as much as, in the absence of availability of requisite number of teachers with TET qualification, the respondents have the jurisdiction to relax the qualification prescribed under the relevant Rules. Even otherwise, the petitioner no. 1 is shown to have completed three years working as Assistant Teacher. So far as the petitioners' claim, on merit, is concerned, the respondents have not been able to dispute it, effectively. No provision of law has been shown disputing the averments made on behalf of the petitioners.
In such view of the matter, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to act strictly in accordance with the clause 4(b) of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014 and to restrict the zone of consideration for promotion to Teachers / Headmaster / Headmistress who possess requisite TET qualification in terms of the clause 4 of the NCTE notification dated 12.11.2014. It would further be appropriate to observe that in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Shiv Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others (2013 (6) ADJ 310), it is the qualification, contained in the NCTE notification, which would be relevant and would have to be scrupulously followed and the respondents cannot bank upon the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 alone to consider the claim of promotion. "
In terms of the afore-quoted order in the case of Deepak Sharma and 3 others (supra), the respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 17.05.2018 by which the promotion process has been stopped for the time being. Aggrieved with this order, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.
It appears that by the impugned order dated 17.05.2018, exercise being undertaken for promotion of Assistant Teachers has been postponed. It has not been cancelled as yet.
Under the circumstances and in view of the order of this court dated 15.05.2018 in the case of Deepak Sharma and 3 others (supra), I do not find any good reason to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.
In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed at this stage.
Order Date :- 1.8.2018
NLY

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

Transfer News - कोर्ट ने महिला शिक्षिका के ऑनलाइन आवेदन के बाद स्थानान्तरण न होने पर उसके द्वारा दोबारा 9 जुलाई के प्रार्थना पत्र पर सचिव का फैसला लेने को कहा, देखें आदेश -

Transfer News - कोर्ट ने महिला शिक्षिका के ऑनलाइन आवेदन के बाद स्थानान्तरण न होने पर उसके द्वारा दोबारा 9 जुलाई के प्रार्थना पत्र पर सचिव का फैसला लेने को कहा, देखें आदेश -

COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

?Court No. - 23

Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 23369 of 2018

Petitioner :- Smt. Meenu Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- O.P. Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ajay Kumar

Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
The petitioner who is Assistant Teacher, is at present, posted in a Primary School at Sumerpur, Block - Mallawa, District Hardoi.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that due to serious illness of in-laws of the petitioner, she moved an application for consideration of her transfer from that Upper Primary School to District Kanpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules, 2008 deals with the posting and transfer of the teachers working in Junior Basic Schools and Senior Basic Schools run by the Board.
The Rule 8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008 provides that in normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers can be entertained of only those teachers who have completed five years of their posting, however, the exception is provided that an application of a female teacher for her transfer at the place of her husband or in-laws would be entertained.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that in case the petitioner is directed to submit on-line application in terms of Government Order dated 13.6.2017, in that event the petitioner would not be eligible for transfer as she has not completed five years of requisite service.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of R.B. Dixit v. Union of India and others, (2005) 1 UPLBEC 83.
Sri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, learned Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of the District Basic Education Officer submits that the State Government has issued guidelines on 13.6.2017 in respect of inter-district transfer of the assistant teachers of Junior Basic Schools and Senior Basic Schools for the session 2017-18. He further submits that on-line applications would be accepted from 16th to 31th August, 2018 and the procedure has been laid down under the said guidelines.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties. With their consent the writ petition is being disposed of finally at this stage in terms of the Rules of the Court.
The Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) (Posting) Rules, 2008 have been framed under Section 19(1) of the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972. The Rule 8(2)(d) provides as under:
"(d) In normal circumstances the applications for inter-district transfers in respect of male and female teachers will not be entertained within five years of their posting. But under special circumstances, applications for inter-district transfers in respect of female teachers would be entertained to the place of residence of their husband or in law's district."
From a reading of the aforesaid Rule it is evident that under the special circumstances an application of a female teacher can be entertained for her transfer at the place of residence of her husband or in-law's district. In such cases the requirement of five years of posting has been relaxed.
It is a well settled law that the Government Order cannot supplant the law, it can only supplement it. Indisputably, an executive order cannot override the Rules which have been framed by the rule making authority in exercise of powers conferred upon it by the Act. In case of any inconsistency with the delegated legislation, executive instructions or the Government Order, the Rule cannot be ignored. The same issue fell for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in R.B. Dixit (supra) in the following terms:
"6. We have held in Smart Chip v. State of U.P., 2002 (49) ALR 419, that in every legal system there is a hierarchy of norms as noted by the eminent jurist Kelson in his Pure Theory of Law. In the Indian Legal System this hierarchy is as follows:
1. The Constitution.
2. Statutory law, which may either be made by the Parliament or by the State legislature.
3. Delegated legislation, which may be either in the form of Rules, Regulations or Statutes made under the Act.
4. Executive instructions or Government Orders.
7. In the above hierarchy if there is conflict between a higher law and a lower law then the higher law will prevail. The executive instructions are part of the fourth layer in the hierarchy, which is at the lowest level, whereas an Act is part of the second layer and the Statutes made under the Act are delegated legislation and hence part of the third layer. The letters dated 31.8.1998 and 30.3.1999 are only executive instructions and hence they belong to the fourth layer. Hence they are neither Act nor Statutes. Hence in our opinion the age of retirement of an employee of the Indian Institute of technology is 60 years and not 62 years vide Section 13(2). We, therefore, respectfully disagree with the decision in Raja Ram Verma's case."
This issue has been considered by this Court in the case of Sarita Gupta v. State of U.P. & Others, Writ-A No. 7096 of 2010, decided on 30.7.2010. The Court had occasion to deal with the similar arguments and at that time a Government order was issued imposing certain restrictions on transfer. The Court has expressed its view in the following terms:
"The ban is general in nature. However, the provision of transfer for the purposes of placing husband and wife in the same district is a special provision which will normally prevail upon general temporary restriction on transfer.
Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. Secretary, U.P. Basic Education Parishad, Allahabad, is directed to decide the matter ignoring the ban order dated 6.6.2009. The decision shall be taken positively within three weeks from today."
It is trite that in most of the services of the Central Government and the State Governments, there is provision in their transfer policy that an endeavour should be made that husband and wife may be posted at the same place. In view of the said principle, under the Rules 2008 the provision of the couple posting has been incorporated.
The intention of rule making authority is very clear and it needs no elaboration.Relevant it would be to mention that in transfer policy of State Government for Government employees there is provision only for husband and wife but in Rule 8(2) (d) of the Rules, 2008 the in-laws of the female teachers have also been included. Hence, in my view, in spite of the Government Order dated 13.6.2017 a female teacher's application for her transfer on the ground of couple posting or in-laws can be entertained notwithstanding some of the contrary provisions of the said Government order.
For the above-mentioned reasons, there is no legal bar in considering the representation of the petitioner in terms of Rule 8(2)(d) of the Rules, 2008.
Accordingly, a direction is issued upon the O.P. No.1, Special Secretary, Department of Basic Education, Government of U.P., Lucknow, to consider the representation dated 09.07.2018 of the petitioner in the light of the observations made herein-above and pass appropriate order expeditiously, preferably within six weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 16.8.2018
Adarsh

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

Wednesday, August 15, 2018

Breaking News -अब केंद्रीय विद्यालय प्राइमरी शिक्षक भर्ती में B Ed वाले पात्र -

Breaking News -अब केंद्रीय विद्यालय प्राइमरी शिक्षक भर्ती में B Ed वाले पात्र -

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

CTET Breaking News - CTET प्राइमरी लेवल परीक्षा में बी एड को शामिल करने की अगली सुनवाई 20 अगस्त को, देखें कोर्ट में क्या हुआ

CTET Breaking News - CTET  प्राइमरी लेवल परीक्षा में बी एड को शामिल करने की अगली सुनवाई 20 अगस्त को, देखें कोर्ट में क्या हुआ

BTC वालों की तरफ से दिग्गज वकील अशोक खरे ने पैरवी की है, और NCTE नोटिफिकेशन को गलत बताया , कहा कि प्राइमरी के लिए B Ed वैलिड क्वालिफिकेशन है ही नहीं,
केंद्र सरकार की तरफ से प्रतिनिधि मौजूद नहीं थे, अब अगली तारीख 20 अगस्त को होगी

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16920 of 2018
Petitioner :- Bhanu Pratap Yadav And Another
Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh Tripathi,Dhananjay Awasthi,Hridai Narain Pandey

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Heard Sri H.N. Singh, learned Sr. Advocate, assisted by Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri� Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and Sri H.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4.
None appears on behalf of respondent no.1 Union of India.
An impleadment application has been filed today which is taken on record. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and learned counsels for the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4, the impleadment application is allowed.
The proposed respondents may be impleaded as respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7.
Necessary correction in the array of parties be carried during the course of the day.
On 7.8.2018, this court passed the following order:
Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners states that Relief No.1 is not being pressed. He states that petitioners are pressing only reliefs No.2 and 3, which are, as under:
"(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondents to include the B.ed. course in eligibility criteria for Central Teacher Eligibility Test 2018.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to fill up online application of the Central Teacher Eligibility Test 2018."
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that National Council for Teachers Education has issued a Notification being F. No. NCTE-Regl 012/16/2018, dated 28.06.2018 in exercise of powers conferred under Section 23(1) of The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 whereby the earlier notifications were amended, as under:
"NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION�
NOTIFICATION�
New Delhi, the 28th June, 2018�
F. No. NCTE-Regl 012/16/2018.--In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 23 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act. 2009 (35 of 2009) and in pursuance of notification number S.O. 750(E), dated the 31st March, 2010 issued by the Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) hereby makes the following further amendments to the notification number F.N.61-03/20/2010/NCTE/(N&S), dated the 23rd August, 2010, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4, dated the 25th August, 2010, hereinafter referred to as the said notification namely:--
(1) In the said notification, in para 1 in sub-para (i), in clause (a) after the words and brackets "Graduation and two year Diploma in ElementaryEducation (by whatever name known), the following shall be inserted, namely:-
OR�
"Graduation with at least 50 % marks and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.)"
2. In the said notification in para 3, for sub-para(a), the following sub-para shall be substituted namely:-
"(a) who has acquired the qualification of Bachelor of Education from any NCTE recognized institution shall be considered for appointment as a teacher in classes I to V provided the person so appointed as a teacher shall mandatorily undergo a six month Bridge Course in Elementary Education recognized by the NCTE, within two years of such appointment as primary teacher".
SANJAY AWASTHI, Member Secy.
[ADVT.-III/4/Exty./121/18-19]
Note : The Principal Notification was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4, dated the 25th August, 2010 vide number 64-03/20/2010/NCTE(N&S), dated the 23rd August, 2010 and amended vide number 61-1/2011/NCTE(N&S), dated the 29th July, 2011."
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners possessed B.Ed. Degree but the information bulletin issued by the respondent No.4 for conducting Teachers Eligibility Test, does not include B.Ed. as qualification in Para 6.1, therefore, non inclustion of the B.Ed. Degree in Para 6.1 under the heading 'ELIGIBILITY', is in conflict with the aforenoted notification dated 28.06.2018.
None appears on behalf of the respondent No.2.
Sri Rajesh Tripathi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel and Sri H.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 pray for and are granted a week's time to obtain instructions or to file a short counter affidavit. The respondent No.2 is also directed to file a short counter affidavit within the same period.
Put up as a fresh case on 14.08.2018.
According to the petitioners, initially the respondent no.3 issued "CTET 2018 Information Bulletin" wherein vide paragraph 6.1 it prescribed the minimum qualification which includes "Graduation with at least 50% marks and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.)".� But after two hours, this information Bulletin was withdrawn and a new information Bulletin was issued wherein the aforesaid qualification of "Graduation with at least 50% marks and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.)" was deleted which prima facie appears to be in conflict with the notification dated 28.6.2018 issued by the NCTE.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned Sr. Advocate, assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 5,6 and 7 submits that the notification itself is in conflict with the provisions of Teachers Education Act, 1993 and the regulations framed thereunder inasmuch as Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) is recognised qualification for secondary and Senior Secondary School (Class 6 to 10), therefore, by the notification dated 28.6.2018, the qualification of B.Ed. has been applied to Primary Education (for classes 1 to 5). Thus, qualification of B.Ed. prescribed for higher standard can not be prescribed to be a qualification for lower standard classes.
Despite the time granted neither the counsel for the respondent no.2 nor the counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 could clarify the aforesaid inconsistency. None appears for the Union of India to assist the Court in this matter. Short counter affidavit as directed by order dated 7.8.2018 has also not been filed.
Under the Circumstances, the Court considered to call upon the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to remain personally present before this Court to explain the situation but on the request of the learned counsels for the respondent nos. 2,3 and 4 one more opportunity is afforded to all the respondents to clarify the situation by filing their short counter affidavits. If short counter affidavits are not filed before the next date fixed, then the court may consider to direct the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to remain personally present before this Court.
In the short counter affidavit all the respondents shall also reply to the contentions raised by respondent nos. 5,6 and 7 as aforenoted.
Put up on 20.8.2018 as a fresh case.
Order Date :- 14.8.2018/vkg

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

Tuesday, August 14, 2018

अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण याचिका ख़ारिज , लेकिन अब क्या

अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण याचिका ख़ारिज , लेकिन अब क्या

अंतर्जनपदीय स्थानांतरण याचिका ख़ारिज करने में हाई कोर्ट जज केसरवानी जी ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट के महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय Bank Of India vs Jagjit Singh Mehta का उल्लेख किया , जिसमे हाई कोर्ट के निर्णय को रद्द करते हुए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने पति पत्नी के एक स्थान पर पोस्टिंग की याचिका कुछ कारण गिनाते हुए ख़ारिज की थी , देखते हैं क्या है वह निर्णय :

Bank Of India vs Jagjit Singh Mehta on 22 November, 1991 में जगजीत सिंह ने क्लर्क से ऑफिसर में प्रमोशन पर Any Where in India Transfer पर सहमति दी थी , लेकिन प्रमोशन होने के बाद पत्नी के कार्यस्थल के नजदीक ट्रांसफर पाने में हाई कोर्ट से सफल हुए थे , उसके बाद बैंक ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट में अपील दाखिल की और सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने प्रशानिक कारणों पर ट्रांसफर के आधार को सही मानते हुए हाई कोर्ट आदेश को रद्द कर दिया और पति पत्नी साथ पोस्टिंग
का निर्णय इस आधार पर रद्द हो गया था |

हालाँकि ऐसे अंतरजनपदीय स्थानांतरण याचिका ख़ारिज निर्णय को सुप्रीम कोर्ट के इसी निर्णय या और कई सुप्रीम कोर्ट के महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय के द्वारा बेहतर रूप से ऊपरी बेंच में अपील की जा सकती है , जिसमे प्रसाशनिक अड़चन / पॉलिसी डिसीजन को कोई मुश्किल न मानते हुए हल बताये जा सकते हैं |
हालाँकि वकील अच्छा हो , जो की पक्ष को बेहतर रूप से रख सके |

हाल ही कुछ विशेष लोगों के ट्रांसफर सचिव कार्यालय के पत्र द्वारा होने की खबर न्यूज़ में थी , इसके प्रमाण व जिन कारणों के तहत ट्रांसफर हुए , उनको भी बताया जा सकता है |
ट्रांसफर लिस्ट में खामियों को बता कर फर्जियों को बाहर कराने की कोशिश की जा सकती है -
https://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com/2018/03/transfer-list-me-farjeewada-joining.html

प्रसाशनिक के सामने क्या अड़चन होगी , ज्यादा से ज्यादा कहीं कुछ शिक्षक कम होंगे , लेकिन नयी भर्तियां भी चालू हैं |
कहीं कुछ शिक्षक कम होंगे , लेकिन कुछ शिक्षक रिटायर भी हो रहे होंगे |
तो कोर्ट से मांग की जा सकती है , कि वेकेंसी भरने पर इन शिक्षकों को ट्रांसफर का मौका मिले ,
रिटायर होने पर नए शिक्षकों को ट्रांसफर के द्वारा भी लिया जा सकता है |

पति पत्नी दूर दूर रह रहे , चाइल्ड केयर / बच्चों की देखभाल की मुश्किल झेल रहे कपल्स या अन्य विशेष मुश्किल झेल रहे शिक्षकों की मदद
शायद सुप्रीम कोर्ट या हाई कोर्ट के टॉप लॉयर बेहतर रूप से कर सकें |

पॉलिसी जनता की भलाई के लिए होती हैं , चाइल्ड केयर लीव का प्रावधान किन्ही कारणों से ही किया गया |
यह कोर्ट के इस निर्णय में देखें : https://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com/2018/07/transfer-news.html
(हालाँकि यह नीचली अदालत ट्रिब्यूनल का निर्णय है और बाद में हाई कोर्ट द्वारा ख़ारिज हो चुका है और अभी आये निर्णय से इसका कोई प्रभाव नहीं होगा , और इसलिए ऐसे मसलों के लिए सुप्रीम कोर्ट/हाई कोर्ट के टॉप वकील शायद कुछ राह बना पाएं )

हालाँकि याचिका ख़ारिज करने में बताये गए सुप्रीम कोर्ट के निर्णय की काट में सुप्रीम कोर्ट का ही निर्णय - The only thing required is that the departmental authorities should consider this aspect along with the exigencies of administration and enable the two spouses to live together at one station if it is possible without any detriment to the administrative needs and the claim of other employees."
https://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com/2018/07/union-of-india-and-ors-vs-sl-abbas-on.html
हालाँकि बेहतर रूप से साबित करना होगा की प्रसाशनिक रूप से कोई अड़चन नहीं होगी (नए शिक्षक , रिटायर शिक्षक अदि व अन्य सरप्लस आदि कारण जो भी हों जिनसे प्रशासनिक समाधान संभव है , ये समस्याग्रस्त कपल्स , बीमार , विकलांग आदि लोगों की कुछ मदद कर सके )

Supreme Court of India

Bank Of India vs Jagjit Singh Mehta on 22 November, 1991

Equivalent citations: 1992 AIR 519, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 492

Author: J S Verma

Bench: Verma, Jagdish Saran (J)

           PETITIONER:
BANK OF INDIA

 Vs.

RESPONDENT:
JAGJIT SINGH MEHTA

DATE OF JUDGMENT22/11/1991

BENCH:
VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)
BENCH:
VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)
SHARMA, L.M. (J)
AGRAWAL, S.C. (J)

CITATION:
 1992 AIR  519    1991 SCR  Supl. (2) 492
 1992 SCC  (1) 306   JT 1991 (4) 460
 1991 SCALE  (2)1108


ACT:
Service Law:
Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979:
    Regulation 47,  Notice dated  28.3.1988--Transfer--Bank
Officer--Whether can claim transfer to a particular place on
the ground of spouse's employment.
    Government of  India Memorandum  dated  3.2.1986, Para
4(vi): Banking Companies (Acquisition of Transfer of  Under-
takings) Act, 1970:
    Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979--All
India Service-Posting   of  husband  and   wife   at  one
station--Guidelines--Nature
of



HEADNOTE:
    Regulation 47 of the Bank of India (Officers')  Service
Regulations, 1979 provided that every officer was liable for
transfer to any office or branch of the Bank of India or  to
any place in India.
    The  respondent was posted as a clerk in  the  appellant
Bank  at  Chandigarh. At the time of his  promotion  to  the
Junior Management Grade Scale-1, he gave an undertaking  for
posting  anywhere in India, and was consequently  posted  as
Branch Officer in the State of Bihar. Thereafter, he filed a
writ  petition in the High Court claiming his transfer  to
Chandigarh Zone on the ground of his wife being employed  at
Chandigarh.  The writ petition was allowed. The  Bank  filed
appeal by special leave to this Court.
    It was contended on behalf of the respondent that para 4
(vi) of Memorandum dated 3.4.1986 of the Government of India
contained guidelines for posting of husband and wife at  one
station  which were meant to be followed also by  all  the
Public Sector Undertakings, and, according to the provisions
of the Banking Compa-
493
nies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 and
the Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 made
thereunder, the bank was bound to follow the guidelines  and
directions issued by the Central Government.
Allowing the appeal of the Bank, this Court,
    HELD:   1. Although  the  guidelines  require  the  two
spouses to be posted at one place as far as practicable  the
desirability  of such a course being obvious-yet  that does
not enable any spouse to claim such a posting as of right if
the  departmental authorities do not consider  it  feasible;
nor does it mean that their place of posting should invaria-
bly be one of their choice even though their preference  may
be  taken into account while making the decision in  accord-
ance with the administrative needs. The only thing  required
is  that  the departmental authorities should  consider  the
feasibility of a suitable posting along with the  exigencies
of administration and enable the two spouses to live togeth-
er at one station if it is possible without any detriment to
the  administrative needs and the claim of other  employees.
[pp 495 E; 496 BC]
    2. After accepting a promotion or any appointment in an
All  india  Service, subordinating the need  of  the  couple
living together  at one station, they cannot  as  of  right
claim to be relieved of the ordinary incidents of the  serv-
ice  and avoid transfer to a different place on  the  ground
that  the  spouses  thereby would  be  posted  at  different
places.  While choosing the career and a particular  service
the couple have to bear in mind this factor and be  prepared
to  face  such a hardship particularly when they  belong  to
different  services. They have to make their choice  at  the
threshhold between career prospects and family life. [pp 495
F-H; 496 A]
    3.1 In the instant case, the respondent voluntarily gave
an  undertaking  that he was prepared to be  posted  at  any
place in India and on that basis got promotion and  thereaf-
ter  sought to be relieved of that necessary incident of  an
All India Service on the ground that his wife had to  remain
at Chandigarh. [p. 496 AB]
    3.2  In the face of Regulation 47 of the Bank  of  India
(Officers')  Service  Regulations, 1979 according  to  which
every officer is liable for transfer to any office or branch
of the Bank of India or to any place in India and the  clear
provision  for such transfer in the policy  read  with  the
notice dated March 28, 1988, the High Court's order  cannot
be sustained. [p. 495 BC]
494
    The  High  Court  was in error in  overlooking  all  the
relevant aspect as well as the absence of any legal right in
the  respondent  to claim the relief which it granted  as  a
matter of course. [p. 496 CD]



JUDGMENT:

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4541 of 1991.

From the Judgment and Order dated 6.8.1991 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 2415 of 1991. Dr. Anand Prakash, Mrs. Veena Birbal and Raj Birbal for the Appellants.

D.R. Sehgal, S.K. Bagga and Mrs. S.K. Bagga for the Respond- ents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VERMA, J. The respondent, Jagjit Singh Mehta, is em- ployed at present in the Bank of India as an officer in Junior Management Grade Scale-1 and posted in a Branch Office of the Bank in District Giridih in the State of Bihar. The respondent was earlier employed in the clerical cadre of the Bank and was posted at Chandigarh. According to the policy contained in Annexure-B read with notice dated March 28, 1988 (Annexure-C), on promotion from the clerical cadre to the Officers' Grade, the respondent had to indicate his preparedness for posting anywhere in India according to the availability of vacancies. The respondent readily indi- cated his preparedness to be posted anywhere in India by Annexure-D dated April 19, 1988 when the respondent was posted as a Clerk at Chandigarh prior to his promotion as an Officer.

After getting the promotion as an officer and being posted in Bihar on the above basis, the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 2415 of 1991 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for a direction to the Bank to transfer him from the Bihar Zone to the Chandigarh Zone on the ground that his wife is employed as a Senior Accountant at Chandi- garh. The writ petition has been allowed by a Division Bench (M.R Agnihotri & D.S.Mehra, JJ,) of the High Court by a cryptic order dated 6.8.1991 which reads as under :-

"After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we allow this petition and direct the respondents by issuing a writ of mandamus commanding the Bank of India to transfer the peti-tioner and post him somewhere near Chandigarh as his wife is posted as a Clerk in the office of the Advocate General, Punjab, Chandigarh. This shall be done within a period of two months. No costs."

The petitioner-Bank of India is aggrieved by the above order of the High Court. Special leave is granted. In the face of Regulation 47 of the Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 according to which every officer is liable for transfer to any office or branch of the Bank of India or to any place in India and the clear provision for such a transfer in the policy (Annexure-B) read with notice dated March 28, 1988 (Annexure-C), it is difficult to sustain the High Court's order. However, learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance on para 4

(vi) of a Memorandum dated April 3, 1986 (AnnexureH) of the Government of India containing guidelines for posting of husband and wife at one station which are meant to be fol- lowed also by all the Public Sector Undertakings. Learned counsel urged that according to the statutory provisions contained in the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and the Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 made thereunder, the Bank is bound to follow the guidelines and directions issued by the Cen- tral Government in this behalf.

There can be no doubt that ordinarily and as far as practicable the husband and wife who are both employed should be posted at the same station even if their employers be different. The desirability of such a course is obvious. However, this does not mean that their place of posting should invariably be one of their choice, even though their preference may be taken into account while making the deci- sion in accordance with the administrative needs. In the case of All-India Services, the hardship resulting from the two being posted at different stations may be unavoidable at times particularly when they belong to different services and one of them cannot be transferred to the place of the other's posting. While choosing the career and a particular service, the couple have to bear in mind this factor and be prepared to face such a hardship if the administrative needs and transfer policy do not permit the posting of both at one place without sacrifice of the requirements of the adminis- tration and needs of other employees. In such a case the couple have to make their choice at the threshold between career prospects and family life. After giving preference to the career prospects by accepting such a promotion or any appointment in an All-India Service with the incident of transfer to any place in India, subordinating the need of the couple living together at one station, they cannot as of right claim to be relieved of the ordinary incidents of All-India Service and avoid transfer to a different place on the ground that the spouses thereby would be posted at different places. In addition, in the present case, the respondent voluntarily gave an undertaking that he was. prepared to be posted at any place in India and on that basis got promotion from the clerical cadre to the Officers' grade and thereafter he seeks to be relieved of that necessary incident of All-India Service on the ground that his wife has to remain at Chandigarh. No doubt the guidelines require the two spouses to be posted at one place as far as practicable, but that does not enable any spouse to claim such a posting as of right if the departmental authorities do not consider it feasible. The only thing required is that the departmental authorities should consid- er this aspect along with the exigencies of administration and enable the two spouses to live together at one station if it is possible without any detriment to the administra- tive needs and the claim of other employees. The High Court was in error in overlooking all the relevant aspects as well as the absence of any legal fight in the respondent to claim the relief which the High Court has granted as a matter of course. The High Court's order must, therefore, be set aside.

Consequently, the appeal is allowed, the impugned order of the High Court is set aside and the respondent's writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

k.P.            Appeal
allowed.

Monday, August 13, 2018

UPTET Shiksha Mitra News - - 68500 शिक्षक भर्ती रिजल्ट: 67 अंक पर सामान्य-OBC और 60 अंक पर SC-ST पास हुए

UPTET Shiksha Mitra   News - -

68500 शिक्षक भर्ती रिजल्ट: 67 अंक पर सामान्य-OBC और 60 अंक पर SC-ST पास हुए

68500 सहायक अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा का परिणाम नौ जनवरी के शासनादेश में दिए गए अर्हता अंक के आधार पर जारी किया गया है। 150 अंकों की परीक्षा में 67 (45 प्रतिशत) नंबर पाने वाले सामान्य व ओबीसी जबकि 60 अंक (40 प्रतिशत) अंक पाने वाले एससी/एसटी वर्ग के अभ्यर्थियों को सफल घोषित किया गया है।

हालांकि सरकार ने 21 मई को अर्हता अंक में बड़ा बदलाव करते हुए सामान्य व ओबीसी वर्ग के अभ्यर्थियों को 49 नंबर (33 प्रतिशत) जबकि एससी/एसटी वर्ग के अभ्यर्थियों को 45 नंबर (30 प्रतिशत) पर पास करने का आदेश दिया था। इसको लेकर हाईकोर्ट में याचिका हो गई जो विचाराधीन है। सचिव परीक्षा नियामक प्राधिकारी डॉ. सुत्ता सिंह ने शासन को पत्र लिखकर अर्हता अंक के संबंध में मार्गदर्शन मांगा था। विशेष सचिव शासन देव प्रताप सिंह ने 8 अगस्त को सामान्य/ओबीसी को 45 व एससी/एसटी अभ्यर्थियों को 40 प्रतिशत अंक पर पास करने के निर्देश दिए थे।र्थियों को 40 प्रतिशत अंक पर पास करने के निर्देश दिए थे।

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

UPTET Shiksha Mitra News - - 68500 सहायक अध्यापक रिजल्ट: हाईकोर्ट के निर्णय के अधीन परीक्षा का परिणाम, शिक्षा मित्र 25 अंक का बोनस पा कर 60 / 67 पर पास , लिखित में 35/42 अंक चाहिए, लेकिन मांग 30/33 पर पास की है

UPTET Shiksha Mitra   News - -
68500 सहायक अध्यापक रिजल्ट: हाईकोर्ट के निर्णय के अधीन परीक्षा का परिणाम, शिक्षा मित्र 25 अंक का बोनस पा कर 60 / 67 पर पास , लिखित में 35/42 अंक चाहिए, लेकिन मांग 30/33 पर पास की है

सोमवार को घोषित 68500 सहायक अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा-2018 का परिणाम हाईकोर्ट के निर्णय के अधीन होगा। सचिव डॉ. सुत्ता सिंह ने अपनी विज्ञप्ति में इस बात का जिक्र किया है। हालांकि अर्हता अंक का विवाद आसानी से सुलझने वाला नहीं है। दरअसल सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने बगैर टीईटी सहायक अध्यापक पद पर समायोजित सूबे के 1.37 लाख शिक्षामित्रों का समायोजन 25 जुलाई 2017 को निरस्त कर दिया था। उसके बाद शिक्षामित्रों ने राहत के लिए बड़ा आंदोलन किया लेकिन सरकार ने एक नहीं सुनी। यही नहीं सहायक अध्यापक पद पर भर्ती के लिए लिखित परीक्षा की व्यवस्था लागू कर दी। हालांकि शिक्षामित्रों को अनुभव के लिए भारांक देने का प्रावधान अध्यापक सेवा नियमावली में किया गया है। लेकिन इसके बावजूद शिक्षामित्रों के लिए 68500 सहायक अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा पास करना किसी चुनौती से कम नहीं था। माना जा रहा है कि शिक्षामित्रों के दबाव में ही 21 मई को सरकार ने अर्हता अंक 45/40 से घटाकर 21 मई को 33/30 अंक कर दिया था। परिणाम से साफ है कि बड़ी संख्या में शिक्षामित्र पास नहीं हो सके हैं। ऐसे में वे 33/30 अर्हता अंक के आधार पर परिणाम घोषित करवाने के लिए कोई कसर नहीं छोड़ेंगे।

सिर्फ 68500 शिक्षक भर्ती के लिए मान्य प्रमाणपत्र

इलाहाबाद। 68500 सहायक अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा का प्रमाणपत्र इसी भर्ती के लिए मान्य है। परीक्षा में पदों के सापेक्ष कम अभ्यर्थी पास हुए हैं। यदि 68500 से अधिक अभ्यर्थी पास होते तो भी उन्हें आवेदन का एक ही अवसर मिलता। अगली बार जो भर्ती शुरू होगी उसके लिए फिर से लिखित परीक्षा कराई जाएगी। सचिव के अनुसार एक महीने के अंदर जिला शिक्षा एवं प्रशिक्षण संस्थानों (डायट) में 68500 शिक्षक भर्ती के प्रमाणपत्र भेज दिए जाएंगे

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

UPTET Shiksha Mitra News -68500 भर्ती की लिखित परीक्षा का परिणाम जारी , विज्ञापित पदों से भी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थी कम

UPTET Shiksha Mitra News -68500 भर्ती की लिखित परीक्षा का परिणाम जारी , विज्ञापित पदों से भी उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थी कम