CW 8232/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** [1] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8232/08 Purshottam Mehta & (3) Ors Versus State & Ors. [2] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8552/08 Radhey Shyam Meena Versus The Director, Elementary Education & Anr. [3] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8401/08 Smt. Gaura Kumari Versus State & Ors. [4] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7925/08 Vijendra Singh & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [5] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7926/08 Smt. Vimla Bai Meena & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [6] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7927/08 Jogendra Singh & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [7] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7928/08 Ram Naresh & Anr. Versus State & Ors. [8] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7944/08 Mahesh Kumar Dangi & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [9] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7997/08 Laxmi Narayan Meena & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [10] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7998/08 Satya Narayan Meena & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [11] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8027/08 Sushila Saini Versus State & Ors. [12] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8040/08 Ramesh Lal Meena Versus State & Ors. [13] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8087/08 Dinesh Chand Sharma & Ors. Versus State & Ors. [14] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8088/08 Ramswaroop Gurjar & Anr. Versus State & Ors. [15] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8168/08 Rambabu Sen Versus State & Ors. [16] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8170/08 Madhulata Gupta Versus State & Ors. [17] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8643/08 Ramchandra Verma Versus State & Anr. [18] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8663/08 Radheyshyam Yogi Versus State & Ors. [19] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8676/08 Rishikesh Meena Versus State & Ors. [20] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8680/08 Kailash Chand Meena Versus State & Ors. [21] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8162/08 Smt. Krishna Gupta Versus State & Ors. [22] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8260/08 Ram Bilash Mehta & Ors Versus State & Ors. [23] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8633/08 Mohd. Intekhab Versus State & Ors. [24] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8634/08 Babulal Verma Versus State & Ors. [25] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9173/08 Giriraj Pd. Mali Versus State & Ors. CW 8232/08 //2// [26] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9176/08 Mithlesh Parmar & Ors Versus State & Ors. [27] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9179/08 Shankarlal Banjara & Ors Versus State & Ors. [28] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9180/08 Raghuveer S. Tanwar & Ors Versus State & Ors. [29] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9214/08 Ramniwas Meena & Ors Versus State & Ors. [30] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9047/08 Trilokesh Sain & Ors Versus State & Ors. [31] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8813/08 Mool Chand Versus State & Anr. [32] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9076/08 Ram Niwas Meena Versus State & Ors. [33] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9114/08 Umesh Dutt Katara Versus State & Ors. [34] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9161/08 Smt. Saroj Kumari Versus State & Ors. [35] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9520/08 Hussain Khan Versus State & Ors. [36] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9519/08 Ibrahim Khan Versus State & Ors. [37] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9306/08 Smt. Manju Saraswat & Anr Versus State & Ors. [38] S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9338/08 Khalil &Anr. Versus State & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 11/09/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Advocates : Sarva Shri Mr. Satish Birjania, D.V. Tholia, Jitendra K. Sharma, Sunil K.Singodiya, Hari Krishna Sharma. Dinesh Yadav, Bharat Saini, Ravi Shanker Sharma, Vijay Pathak, Om Pra.Sheoran Jitendra Pandey, RK Sharma, D.S.Choudhary ] for petitioners ] Mr. Rajnish Gupta, for respondents Since these petitions involve common question, accordingly, are being decided by present order. Ppost of Prabodhak is included in the Schedule appended to Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Rules, 2008 [“Rules, 2008”]. Condition of eligibility required under the Scheme of Rules, 2008 is reproduced as under: CW 8232/08 //3// “2. Prabodhak 100% by (4500-7000) direct recruitment Senior Secondary School certificate or intermediate or its equivalent, with Diploma or certificate in basic teachers training of a duration of not less than two years or Diploma or certificate in elementary teachers training of a duration of not less than two years. OR Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.EI. Ed.) OR Graduation with Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) or its equivalent. AND Must have at least 5 years continuous teaching experience without any break in any recognized educational institution/ educational project.” Petitioners who are presently undergoing their Basic Training Course [BSTC]/B.Ed which is one of conditions of eligibility for the post of Prabodhak under Rules, 2008, submitted their application in pursuance of advertisement dt. 31/05/08 despite the fact that under Note 3 appended to the advertisement, applicant is to fulfill condition of eligibility upto last date of submission of application (viz. 26th June, 2008. However, under Note 2 such like applicants holding professional qualification – diploma/ certificate in nursery teacher education CW 8232/08 //4// programme [NTT] or pre-school teacher education are permitted to participate with the condition that till they acquire the training of BSTC/ B.Ed. or Bridge course, as the case may be, if selected will be appointed on stipend of Rs. 2750/- and will get appointment on attaining the training or Bridge Course under Scheme of Rules, 2008. BSTC/B.Ed course is of two/one years' duration and some of petitioners have joined or appeared in 1st year and their results are still awaited. At the same time, some of petitioners are pursuing 2nd year and few among them are those who appeared in 2nd year but either failed or got supplementary and supplementary examination of BSTC 2nd year has been held a day earlier by concerned institution, as informed to this Court, but at the same time, it is relevant to mention that in pursuance of advertisement dt.31st May, 2008 process of selection has been initiated by the respondents and their interviews have also commenced from 8th August, 2008 but since there are large number of applicants who have submitted their application process will be completed, as informed to this court, by 2nd week of September, 2008. Counsel for petitioners submits that CW 8232/08 //5// when applicants who are holding training/ certificate of NTT or pre-primary teachers training certificate are being permitted to participate in the process of selection in the absence of holding diploma/certificate of BSTC/ B.Ed or Bridge Course and considered for appointment on stipend of Rs.2750/- adopting different standard by not permitting such applicants who have joined BSTC/B.Ed Course and may qualify the same in near future; denial of their consideration is discriminatory & violative of Art.14 of Constitution of India. Counsel further submits that present petitioners are working as Para-Teachers in various projects under the Government and object of Rules, 2008 is to regularize such para- teachers who are attached to various government projects but by adopting different criteria with regard to the eligibility, very purpose with which Rules, 2008 have been enacted by rule making authority, stands frustrated and despite the fact that the petitioners are working for sufficient long time as Para Teacher, will be deprived from their right of fair consideration for which they are otherwise entitled for. Counsel for petitioners further submits that at the time of their appointment as Para CW 8232/08 //6// Teacher in various projects of Government, there was no such condition that applicant should hold BSTC/B.Ed or other teachers' training and petitioners have undergone sufficient experience as Para teacher, which itself is a teaching experience/training as required under Rules, 2008 as such are eligible to participate in pursuance of advertisement dt.31/05/08. Counsel further submits that NTT/pre- teachers' training is not the qualification for the post of Prabodhak under Rules, 2008; as such once relaxation has been provided to such applicants holding NTT or pre-school teachers' training course, atleast applicants working as para teachers in Government projects, are also entitled for same relaxation who may acquire training near future for getting appointment in terms of present advertisement; such action of respondents is violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. Counsel placed reliance upon decisions in Subhash Chand Jain Vs. Delhi Elect. Supply Undertaking (AIR 1981 SC 75), State of Karnataka Vs. H. Ganesh Kamath (1983(3) SCC 402) & Yogesh Kumar Vs. Govt. of NCT Delhi (2003(3) SCC 548). CW 8232/08 //7// Respondents have filed reply to writ petition (8232/2008) wherein it has been inter- alia averred that National Council for Teacher Education in exercise of its power under clause (d)(i) of sub-section (2) of Section 32 read with Section 12(d) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 has laid down minimum qualification for recruitment of Teachers in schools - NCTE (for determination of minimum qualification for recruitment of Teachers in schools) Regulations 2001 (“NCT Regulations, 2001”) and for Pre-Schools/Nursery followed by first two years in formal school for children in the age group of 4-6 and 6-8 years teachers are supposed to hold Diploma/ Certificate in Pre-School teacher education or B.Ed. in Nursery or Diploma/Certificate in Nursery Teacher education of not less than two years for B.Ed. (Nursery), applicants holding professional qualification of NTT/Pre-School Teacher Education, have to be updated by undergoing Bridge Course to hold the post of Prabodhak under the Rules, 2008 but at the same time so far as the present petitioners are concerned, they are not holding any professional qualification prescribed by NCTE under its Regulations, 2001 and have either joined BSTC or CW 8232/08 //8// appeared in first year, their results are awaited or some of them have appeared in second year but have either failed or got supplementary and their examination is yet to be held. In such circumstances, no parity can be claimed by the petitioners with those holding professional qualification of Pre-School/Nursery, as referred to, by the NCTE under its Regulations, 2001. Government counsel further submits that State Government has taken decision that since NTT/Pre-school teachers training is a complete training course as per NCT Regulations, 2001, NTT/Pre-school teachers training are one of professional qualifications of a pre-school/ nursery for a formal school which is in terms of curriculum laid down under NCT Regulations, 2001. A committee was constituted which was attended by a representative of NCT, in which a decision has been taken that after having undergone six months bridge Course, NTT/Pre- Teachers' training holders will be qualified to hold the post of Prabodhak under Rules, 2008. I have considered rival contentions of Counsel for both the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. The CW 8232/08 //9// facts remain un-controverted that almost all the petitioners are presently working in various projects of Government as a para teacher or in any other capacity and holding more than five years' teaching experience but none of them possess requisite training of BSTC/ B.ED of elementary education. It has also come on record that like petitioner No.3 in CWP-7998/2008 and petitioner Nos.3 to 6 in CWP-7926/08 as pointed out have appeared in 1st year BSTC and results are still awaited. At the same time, petitioner NO.2 in CWP-8401/08 has failed in 2nd year BSTC and few of them are those appeared in 2nd year of BSTC but got supplementary - whose papers, as informed, have been held by concerned authority but it result is still awaited. At the same time, few are those who appeared in B.Ed but its resulted is still awaited and as per Note 3 to advertisement dt.31/05/08, applicants have to fulfill conditions of eligibility on last date (26/06/08) of submission of application. Recruitment qualifications for teachers in educational institutions mentioned in Section 2 of NCT Regulations, 2001 are ad infra: CW 8232/08 //10// PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS [I. Pre-School/Nursery (i) Secondary School (Class ten) certificate or its (For children in the age equivalent; and group of 4-6 years) (ii) Diploma/Certificate in Pre-school teacher education programme of a duration of not less than one year, or B.Ed. (Nursery). II. Pre-School/Nursery followed by first two years in a formal school. (i) Senior Secondary School (Class twelve) Certificate or intermediate or its equivalent with at least 45% marks; and (For children in the age group of 4-6 and 6-8 years) (ii) Diploma/Certificate in Nursery teacher education programme of a duration of not less than two years, or B.Ed. (Nursery). III. Elementary (a) Primary (b) Upper Primary (Middle school Section) (i) Senior Secondary School certificate or Intermediate or its equivalent; and (ii) Diploma or certificate in basic teachers training of a duration of not less than two years. OR Bachelor or Elementary Education [B.EI.Ed.) (i) Senior Secondary School certificate or Intermediate or its equivalent; and (ii) Diploma or certificate in elementary teachers training of a duration of not less than two years. OR Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.EI.Ed.) OR Graduate with Bachelor of Education [B.Ed.) or its equivalent. IV. Secondary/High School Graduate with Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) or its equivalent; OR Four years' integrated B.Sc., B.Ed. or an equivalent course. V. Senior Secondary/PUC/Intermediate Master's Degree in the relevant subject with Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) or its equivalent. OR Two years' integrated M.Sc..Ed. course or an equivalent course.] Such applicants holding professional qualification of NTT/Pre-school Teachers training as per NCT Regulations, and having been permitted to participate, and if finally selected, will be appointed on a stipend of Rs. 2,750/- with the condition to undergo six months bridge course which may update them to get CW 8232/08 //11// regular appointment as Prabodhak in terms of advertisement. Reg.5 of NCT Regulations, 2001, provides relaxation.- 5. Power to relax – Where the Council is satisfied, on receipt of reference from the concerned Government that special circumstances exist warranting relaxation of some of provisions of the regulations for some time it may grant relaxation of that provision to such extent and subject to such conditions as it may consider necessary in a just and equitable manner.” As informed, a committee was constituted by State Government to consider NTT/Pre-School Teachers' training, and in its meeting held on 25/03/08 where a member of NCT also attended and finally took decision to hold six months bridge course for NTT holders and till they qualify the same, they may paid stipend of Rs.2750/- and finally matter has been sent for approval of NCT alongwith curriculum for grant of relaxation U/Reg.5 of NCT Regulations, 2001 so that holders of professional qualification viz. NTT/Pre- School teachers training can also be considered for regular appointment in future on completion of their six months bridge course. Submission made by Counsel for CW 8232/08 //12// petitioners questioning very condition of training which is one of eligibility conditions under Rules, 2008, is of no substance for the reason that qualifications have been prescribed in terms of NCTE Regulations, 2001 and professional qualification is also one of the eligibility conditions and State Government is under obligation to frame Rules in conformity with NCTE Regulations, 2001. As regards second contention urged by Counsel for petitioners about object of framing Rules, 2008 providing eligibility to such persons serving in Educational projects of State Government; suffice it to say that in cases of those serving in educational projects, relaxation has been provided to them in regard to age U/r 13(v) of Rules, 2008. At the same time, experience of educational projects has also been recognized in terms of R.2(k) of Rules, 2008 and certainly object is to bring such persons serving in various educational projects of State Government at par so as to consider them also for appointment; but keeping in view the eligibility condition under Rules, 2008 being in conformity with NCTE Regulations, 2001 will only be considered for appointment and object of Rules, 2008 cannot be examined and CW 8232/08 //13// considered in isolation. As regards contentions made of having adopted different standards between those holding professional qualification of NTT/Pre- School Teachers' Training qua those like petitioners undergoing BSTC/B.Ed is of no substance for the reason that petitioner as on today are not holding professional qualification being in conformity with NCTE Regulations, 2001 but at the same time, such applicants holding NTT/Pre-school Teachers' training are certainly holding professional qualifications for age group of 4-6 years & 6-8 years' students in terms of NCTE Regulations, 2001 and after undergoing Bridge course they will be updated to hold post of Prabodhak under Rules, 2008. No parity can be claimed by them who are not holding professional qualifications in terms of NCTE Regulations, 2001 and are presently undergoing and have not yet completed such training course till last date of submission of application (26/06/08) in terms of advertisement dt.31/05/08. Certainly applicants holding professional qualifications under NCTE Regulations, 2001, constitute a separate class and such classification having reasonable nexus in the opinion of this Court cannot be CW 8232/08 //14// considered to be violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. Judgment, on which Counsel has placed reliance, in Subhash C.Jain Vs. Delhi Elect. Supply Undertaking (supra), was a case, where Steno-typists were working in Govt. organisation and post of Junior Stenographer was promotional post for which a trade test was required to be qualified by incumbents. Apex Court while upholding prescription of trade test for the post of Junior Stenographer, has laid down criteria to resolve inter-se disputes between Steno typist & Junior Steno, which in instant case has no application. In Yogesh Kumar Vs. Govt. NCT Delhi (supra), Apex Court observed that recruitment to public services should be made strictly in accordance with terms of advertisement and recruitment rules. It was a case where B.Ed was not a prescribed qualification but still some B.Ed candidates participated in contravention of terms of advertisement, per se vitiating process of selection, so Apex Court observed that such illegality cannot be allowed to continue. In instant case, the authority has acted strictly in accordance with conditions of advertisement and only such applicants holding professional CW 8232/08 //15// qualifications have been permitted, which is in conformity with NCTE Regulations, 2001. Hence judgment cited is of no assistance. Judgment in State of Karnataka Vs. H. Ganesh Kamath (supra) being not remotely concerned with issue involved in instant case, is of no assistance. Consequently, writ petitions fail and are hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.15/8232CW08prbdkNTT.doc