R.N.BISWAL, J. W.P.(C) NO.11665 OF 2010 (Decided on 16.11.2010) RAGHUNATH NAYAK & ORS. …………. Petitioners. .Vrs. STATE & ANR. …………. Opp.Parties. For Petitioner - M/s. B.Routray, D.K.Mohapatra, P.K.Sahoo, S.Das, S.Jena. For Opp.Parties – M/s. Mr. B.P.Tripathy (Standing Counsel) R.N.BISWAL,J. The petitioners, who intend to take admission in B.Ed course for the session 2010-11 as fresh and in-service candidates, have filed the writ application challenging the guideline under Annexure-3 stipulating institution-wise admission. 2. According to the petitioners, in the year 2009-10 the selection for admission to B.Ed course was done taking State as a unit. The Governments of different States like Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhatisgarh and Andhra Pradesh have also adopted the State-wise selection to B.Ed course. Copy of the notification made by Osmania University, Hyderabad for selection to B.Ed course by competitive examination and the news paper publication in the Times of India on 9.5.2010 are filed as Annexures-4 and 5 respectively. According to the petitioners, if institution-wise selection is allowed to be made it will create serious prejudice to the petitioners and a large number of candidates. There are 14 B.Ed colleges in the State of Orissa with total intake capacity of 1140 candidates. In view of the guidelines under Annexure-3, a candidate shall have to apply to a number of institutions. In case of in-service candidates, it is required to obtain recommendation from the District Inspector of Schools/Circle Inspector of Schools to apply for admission to B.Ed course. So, they are to obtain several recommendations, which is harassment to the candidates both mentally and financially. If the senior-most in-service candidate does not apply for the course in all 14 institutions, he may not get a seat, whereas a candidate having less period of service may get it in a particular institution. Some of the colleges have only 50 intake capacity. In some reserved category 1% seats have been kept reserved. In those colleges where there are only 50 seats the reserved of seat would be 1/2 for those candidates and if it is rounded up to one, then it would affect the number of seats allotted to other reserved categories. In the rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners, it has been stated that merely because there is some resentment among some prospective candidates who are not able to get admission in B.Ed course in their nearby Govt. Institutions and that there is apprehension of Law and Order problem, Government cannot adopt institution based selection. If such selection is allowed to continue, then no student can be admitted beyond his local area, particularly in such courses, where the demand to take admission is very high. The State Government admits that number of trained teachers in the State is much less than the required strength and it is necessary to provide training to the intending candidates. It is also a fact that where trained teachers are not available, untrained teachers are being appointed subject to the condition that they shall acquire training within a stipulated period and are paid untrained scale till they acquire such qualification. In the last year it was the aim and object of the State to provide training to the untrained teachers, who were appointed against TGT yardstick. So, the Opposite Parties can not make a departure from the said principle in the guise of new policy. It is the further case of the petitioners that regular B.Ed course cannot be equated with B.Ed course through Distance Education Programme. A regular course is only of ten months duration, whereas training through Distance Mode of Education is two years duration. Admission fees in regular course is much less than the course in Distance Mode of Education. 3. Furthermore, it is the case of the petitioners that even if the guideline under Annexure-3 is allowed to be adopted, the State Government cannot achieve its goal in selecting the local candidates, since it is open for all eligible candidates throughout the State to apply to any of the institutions and even to all the institutions. The candidates who are not sure to get seats in their respective nearby colleges may apply to other districts where the demand and competition is less. So, no fruitful result will be achieved by adopting institution-wise selection. Under such circumstances, the petitioners pray to allow the writ application. 4. Opposite Party No.2 in his counter affidavit contended that as a matter of policy, the Opposite Parties decided to adopt institution based selection in B.Ed course and other Teacher Education Courses for the academic session 2010-11, taking into consideration certain circumstances which were experienced during State-based selection in 2009-10. Some candidates in some of the districts of the State could not compete with others in the State Level Selection process, as a result of which there was less representation of the candidates from those districts. The Collector, Koraput vide his letter No.189 dated 5.2.2010 intimated the Principal Secretary to Government, Department of School and Mass Education expressing concern for the prevailing law and order situation in the district due to less representation of candidates in the B.Ed Colleges situated in that district. The candidates selected from other districts and admitted in those institutions at Koraput District also felt unsafe to study there. Some of the students belonging to other districts admitted in the B.Ed colleges at Jeypore wrote to the Director, TE and SCERT explaining the problems including physical torture faced by them. They felt unsafe and insecure to study there. Furthermore Jeypore Citizen Committee submitted a representation highlighting the deprivation of local candidates from being selected in and B.Ed and C.T. courses because of state level selection conducted in 2009-10. A meeting of the C.T and B.Ed Central Selection Boards was convened and all these issues were discussed in presence of the Principal Secretary to Government, Department of School and Mass Education, wherein it was resolved that Institution based selection and admission to Teacher Education Courses is the only possibility to overcome the crisis. Accordingly decision was taken to submit the proposal of institution based admission to Teacher Education courses for the academic session, 2010-11 and the draft proposal was submitted to the Govt. for approval. It is the further case of Opposite Party No.2 that as appears from the cause title of the writ petition, petitioner Nos.4 to 9 are working in different High Schools and as such they claim to avail admission on in-service quota. There is no scope for untrained teachers to work in Government as well as in Government aided schools in view of the rule-VII of the Orissa Subordinate Education (Method of Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1993. So, they are not entitled to take admission in B.Ed courses as in-service candidates. 2 Moreover, the Government has already permitted IGNOU to run B.Ed course through Distant Education Programme in 13 districts having 1300 seats exclusively for in-service teachers. This has been done keeping in view that, if untrained teachers avail B.Ed. course through Distant Education Programme, it would not affect the study of students in the High Schools since the Distance Education Programme is conducted during holidays/ vacations. 5. The untrained teachers, who should not have been posted against the posts of Trained Graduate Teachers get double benefit since they get 1300 seats in IGNOU and 171 seats in regular course against only 1140 seats in regular B.Ed course in all the 14 B.Ed Colleges of State. As regards fresh candidates, they are not prejudiced by institution-based selection, since they are free to apply to any of the institutions through out the State, if they so like. Since there is no compulsion in conducting entrance test for admission to Teacher Education Course no provision for entrance test is made in the impugned guidelines. So, OP No.2 prays to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the stand taken by Govt. in para 3 of the Counter affidavit that the impugned guideline is only an inter-departmental communication and cannot be construed as an order since it has not yet been finalized, is absolutely incorrect as the same guidelines has already been approved on 17.6.2010.On perusal of Annexure-3 it is found that it has already been approved by the Govt. in their School and Mass Education Department letter no.10249(XII-SME-Trg- 55/10/SME dated 17.6.2010.So,it cannot be said that it is at the formative stage. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the institution-wise selection has been introduced since there was resentment among the local candidates and in some of the districts like Jeypore some goons threatened the students taking admission in their nearby institutions. As per the guideline, when a candidate can apply to any B.Ed college and even all the B.Ed colleges of the State, the object cannot be achieved. No local candidate can get preference to take admission, since selection will be made on the basis of marks and a candidate of a particular district if applies to an institution of another district he may be selected there. So on this ground alone the impugned guideline under Annexure-3 should be quashed. On the contrary, learned Standing Counsel appearing for School and Mass Education Department contended that some candidates might not apply to the institutions situated at far of places. In that event the local candidates of the far of institutions can be selected for taking admission. As it appeasers from Annexure-3, there is no bar either for fresh or in-service candidates to apply to as many institutions, as they like. When the demand of B.Ed course is very high, a candidate desirous of taking admission in such course most likely shall apply to all available institutions. So, the object of the State cannot be achieved. If the submission of learned Standing Counsel is held to be correct, then the oblique motive of the State Government is to select candidates district-wise which is unconstitutional as has been held by this Court in the case of Miss Alakha Das Vs. the Director, T.E. and SCERT Orissa and another reported in 1995 Vol.2 OLR 145. It has been held in that case that: “District-wise reservation of seats in B.Ed course in the State is unconstitutional and void. Direction was given to State Government to frame appropriate rules for selection on the basis of merit.” 3 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that if institution based selection is allowed to continue and the distribution of seats to reserved categories as per the impugned guideline is followed there would be problem of its implementation. In last State-wise selection,seats reserved on percentage basis for children of Green Card Holders, Ex.Servicemen, Physically handicapped candidates had been deducted from the total number of 1140 seats. As per the new guideline, it would be impracticable to deduct such seats from the total number of seats of a college, where the in-take capacity is 50 seats only. This Court is one with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners in this regard. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners, next submitted that the affidavit filed by the State Government pursuant to the order of this Court dated 8.10.2010 reveals that the draft guideline is still in formative stage, on the ground that there is possibility of admission of in-service candidates in IGNOU. But as a matter of fact such stipulation is very much available in the impugned guideline itself.As the operation of the same is stayed by this Court and some time is elapsed in between, the opp. parties are taking the benefit of the same. The impugned guideline shows that in case the proposal for reservation of seats for untrained teacher in B.Ed distant Education Programme of IGNOU is not approved/does not materialize, 15% of the available seats in each of the categories of UR,SC,ST and OBC/SEBC shall be reserved for in-service candidates. In other words if the IGNOU accepts the proposal there will be no reservation of seats for in-service candidates. The Distant B.Ed course cannot be equated with regular B.Ed course. It takes minimum two years to complete the course by Distant Education Programme, whereas it takes only one year to complete the regular B.Ed course. In the case of Anil Kumar Das and 12 others Vs. State of Orissa and others, Vol. 108(2009) CLT 923 this Court held that distant B.Ed course cannot be compared with regular B.Ed Course. If the IGNOU accepts the proposal and accordingly reservation of seats for in- service candidates is not allowed, then it would be against the decision rendered by this Court in the aforesaid case. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and Annexure-3 is quashed. No cost. Writ petition allowed. 4