UTET : Nainital HC Order - TET Case on 25th March 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No.420 (S/S) of 2014
Poornima Panwar ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.421 (S/S) of 2014
Praveen Kumar ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.422 (S/S) of 2014
Ramesh Chandra Bhatt ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.423 (S/S) of 2014
Rajesh Dutt ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.290 (S/S) of 2014
Km. Babita ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Mr. Jayvardhan Kandpal, Advocate with Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Advocate, present for the petitioners in all the writ petitions.
2. Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5.
3. Mr. Manoj Shah, Advocate, present for the respondent no. 3/Uttarakhand School Education Board, Ram Nagar.
2
4. Petitioners in all the writ petitions belong to Other Backward Classes community (from herein after referred to as “OBC”), known as “Ranwalta”. They claim appointment as an OBC candidate on the post of Primary School Teacher in a Government School. One of the essential conditions for the said post is that one should have passed Uttarakhand Teachers Eligibility Test Examination (from herein after referred to as the “TET”). When the petitioners gave this examination in the year 2013, petitioners did not have OBC Certificate with them. In the said examination, petitioners scored more than 50% marks. The qualifying marks for an OBC candidate in the said examination was 50% and for a General candidate it was 60%. Since the petitioners have appeared in the TET examination as a General candidate, as they were not having OBC Certificate at that particular point of time, they have been declared unsuccessful in Uttarakhand TET-I examination.
5. Contention of the learned State Counsel is that petitioners have applied for the post of Primary School Teacher as an OBC candidate which is not being considered for the reason that they have not passed the Uttarakhand TET Examination with 60% marks in the said examination.
6. This objections of the respondents appear to be unreasonable. Since the petitioners belong to an OBC category, their qualifying cut of marks should not have been judged as 60% as is being judged but it should have been judged as 50%, for an OBC category candidate. This is a prima facie opinion of this Court.
3
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that in a similar writ petition filed by him i.e. Writ Petition No. 315 (S/S) of 2014, this Court has already granted an interim order.
8. In view thereof, as an interim measure, it is directed that the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioners as an OBC Category candidate for the post of Primary School Teacher, if they are otherwise qualified, treating them to be TET qualified, but it shall be subject to the final determination of the writ petitions, as it shall only be provisional. Petitioners shall, however, not be posted as a teacher till finalization of these writ petitions.
9. Respondents shall file their counter affidavit within a period of three weeks. Three weeks’ time thereafter is allowed to the learned counsel for the petitioners to file rejoinder affidavit.
10. List these writ petitions on 15
th
May, 2014 in daily cause list along with Writ Petition No. 315 (S/S) of 2014.
11. Interim Relief Applications in all these writ petitions stand disposed of.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)
25.03.2014
ML
Uttrakhand TET | UTET / टीईटी - Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Recruitment News
Writ Petition No.420 (S/S) of 2014
Poornima Panwar ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.421 (S/S) of 2014
Praveen Kumar ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.422 (S/S) of 2014
Ramesh Chandra Bhatt ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.423 (S/S) of 2014
Rajesh Dutt ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
with
Writ Petition No.290 (S/S) of 2014
Km. Babita ……….Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ………Respondents
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Mr. Jayvardhan Kandpal, Advocate with Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Advocate, present for the petitioners in all the writ petitions.
2. Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5.
3. Mr. Manoj Shah, Advocate, present for the respondent no. 3/Uttarakhand School Education Board, Ram Nagar.
2
4. Petitioners in all the writ petitions belong to Other Backward Classes community (from herein after referred to as “OBC”), known as “Ranwalta”. They claim appointment as an OBC candidate on the post of Primary School Teacher in a Government School. One of the essential conditions for the said post is that one should have passed Uttarakhand Teachers Eligibility Test Examination (from herein after referred to as the “TET”). When the petitioners gave this examination in the year 2013, petitioners did not have OBC Certificate with them. In the said examination, petitioners scored more than 50% marks. The qualifying marks for an OBC candidate in the said examination was 50% and for a General candidate it was 60%. Since the petitioners have appeared in the TET examination as a General candidate, as they were not having OBC Certificate at that particular point of time, they have been declared unsuccessful in Uttarakhand TET-I examination.
5. Contention of the learned State Counsel is that petitioners have applied for the post of Primary School Teacher as an OBC candidate which is not being considered for the reason that they have not passed the Uttarakhand TET Examination with 60% marks in the said examination.
6. This objections of the respondents appear to be unreasonable. Since the petitioners belong to an OBC category, their qualifying cut of marks should not have been judged as 60% as is being judged but it should have been judged as 50%, for an OBC category candidate. This is a prima facie opinion of this Court.
3
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that in a similar writ petition filed by him i.e. Writ Petition No. 315 (S/S) of 2014, this Court has already granted an interim order.
8. In view thereof, as an interim measure, it is directed that the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioners as an OBC Category candidate for the post of Primary School Teacher, if they are otherwise qualified, treating them to be TET qualified, but it shall be subject to the final determination of the writ petitions, as it shall only be provisional. Petitioners shall, however, not be posted as a teacher till finalization of these writ petitions.
9. Respondents shall file their counter affidavit within a period of three weeks. Three weeks’ time thereafter is allowed to the learned counsel for the petitioners to file rejoinder affidavit.
10. List these writ petitions on 15
th
May, 2014 in daily cause list along with Writ Petition No. 315 (S/S) of 2014.
11. Interim Relief Applications in all these writ petitions stand disposed of.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)
25.03.2014
ML
Uttrakhand TET | UTET / टीईटी - Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Recruitment News
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
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
No comments:
Post a Comment