UPTET : Allahabad Highcourt Judgments in the month of December 2011 regarding TET (Teacher Eligibility Test) in UP
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 74386 of 2011
Petitioner :- Lok Nath Tripathi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Kshetresh Chandra Shukla
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Ravi Shankar Prasad
Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
The petitioner was appointed as a Shiksha Mitra in the year 2008. This petition has been filed claiming the following reliefs:- "(i) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari call for the records and set-aside the upper age limit to the extent it relates to working Shiksha Mitra (Annexure No.7 to the writ petition). (ii) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to enhance the upper age limit up to 45 years for working Shiksha Mitra in Primary School run and managed by respondent no.4 like other reserved category candidates."
Annexure-9 (wrongly mentioned as Annexure-7 to the writ petition) is the advertisement dated 22nd September, 2011 issued by the Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education regarding the holding of the Teachers Eligibility Test. It prescribes the maximum age limit for appointment as an Assistant Teacher as 40 years. The petitioner is aged about 43 years. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that since he has been working as a Shiksha Mitra, the age may be relaxed in his case.
It is not possible to accept the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. It was for the authority to prescribe the age and the petitioner cannot insist that the age should be relaxed in his case because he had been working as a Shiksha Mitra for the last three years. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 20.12.2011
NSC ***************************************
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 24
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 7637 of 2011
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secy. Madhyamik Shiksha And Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Jai Pal Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma,J.
Heard Mr. Jai Pal Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Bhushan, learned Standing Counsel.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after completion of B.Ed., the petitioner applied for Teacher Eligibility Test which was held on 13.11.2011. The petitioner's result has been declared on the Internet as 'ABS' which means 'Absent', whereas he appeared in the said test. The last date for submission of applications for Teachers Training is 19.12.2011 and due to non-declaration of result, the petitioner is suffering a lot. Being aggrieved, he moved representations� to the authorities concerned for declaring his result, but no action has been taken.
After arguing the matter at length, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that interest of justice would suffice, if the opposite parties are directed to decide the representations, expeditiously, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection.
Accordingly, the authority concerned is directed to look into the matter and pass appropriate orders on the representations, in accordance with law, expeditiously.
The writ petition stands disposed of finally in above terms. Order Date :- 15.12.2011