Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 770 (CAL)

Arnab Das v. State of West Bengal

2016-09-29

C.S.KARNAN

body2016
C. S. Karnan, J.: The brief facts of the case are as follows : 1. The petitioners submits that they have acquired sufficient academic qualifications as specified by the National Council for Teachers Education. 2. The Respondents/State Government has been granted relaxation under Section 23(2) of RTE Act, 2009 and Rules framed thereunder. The said relaxation had been granted by the Second Respondent herein namely Human Resource Development Department dated 01.04.2015. As per the notification the candidates who secured at least 50% marks in the 10+2 Examination, are eligible to appear in the Teachers’ Eligibility Test for Classes I to V. The trained candidates who completed graduation are also permitted to appear in the Teachers’ Eligibility Test. Actually the notification is not covered for the untrained graduate candidates, as such the Respondents / Primary Education Board has committed violation as per the Teachers’ Eligibility Test guidelines dated 11.02.2011 issued by N.C.T.E. 3. The Petitioners additionally added that one of the conditions in the relaxation notification dated 01.04.2015 was that the state Government and other School Managements shall ensure that teachers who are appointed under the relaxed qualification norms shall acquire the minimum qualification as specified in the National Council for Teachers’ Education notification within a period of 2 years from the year of appointment. The National Council for Teachers’ Education Regulation 2014 provides the eligibility criteria for admitting in the D.El.Ed. Course, is requiring at least 50% in 10+2 examination irrespective of any higher qualification. As such graduate candidates who secured less than 50% marks in 10+2 examination will not be permitted for admission in the said D.El.Ed. Course which is a violation of one of the conditions stated in the relaxation notification dated 01.04.2015 as well as the TET guidelines dated 11.02.2011 also. 4. The petitioners further submit that the West Bengal Board of Primary Education by virtue of their advertisement notification dated 25.05.2015 assured the candidates that the Teachers Eligibility Test will be held strictly in accordance with the National Council for Teachers’ Education guidelines dated 11.02.2011. As per the guidelines the TET for Classes- I to V shall be held for a total aggregate marks of 150 in five subjects, each comprising of 30 marks. As per the guidelines the TET for Classes- I to V shall be held for a total aggregate marks of 150 in five subjects, each comprising of 30 marks. The questions from pedagogical understanding is an essential subject in the Teachers’ Eligibility Test, but unfortunately no question has been prepared relating to the topics in Language-I, Language-II, Mathematics and in Environmental Studies subject, as such the Primary Education Board had committed a gross violation. 5. The petitioners further submit that the Respondents / Primary Education Board had set up questions from out of the usual syllabus, as such the respondents have violated the Teachers’ Eligibility Test guidelines, therefore the notification dated 25.05.2015 is not valid. Hence the above writ petition has been filed challenging the Teachers’ Eligibility Test which was held on 11.10.2015. 6. The respondents/Primary Educational Board has filed a report as per the direction of this Court dated 15.09.2016 stating that in respect of the notification for Teachers’ Eligibility Test on the basis of which the examination was held on 11.10.2015, The Primary Educational Board allowed all the eligible candidates for appearing in the Teachers’ Eligibility Test. The said test was conducted as per the notification dated 01.04.2015 issued by the Human Resource Development Department and strictly as per TET guidelines issued by the NCTE dated 11.02.2011. Therefore, as per the relaxation conditions they have to maintain separate statistical report regarding trained candidates and untrained candidates. The Board after well scrutinising, the filled up application forms of trained candidates and untrained candidates were then permitted to appear for the examination. As per the relaxation conditions, the trained candidates have to succeed in the examination on the basis of marks and towards other viva voice and extracurricular activities criteria, under the circumstances the Board is unable to furnish a statistical report of trained and untrained candidates. The Respondents / Educational Board had not committed any violation in the mode of selection but the writ petitioners have filed the above writ petition on the basis of presumeability. 7. The Respondents / Educational Board had not committed any violation in the mode of selection but the writ petitioners have filed the above writ petition on the basis of presumeability. 7. The Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent/Primary Educational Board has committed several irregularities namely- The examination Paper-I consisting of five subjects namely :- Child Development & Pedagogy, Language-I, Language-II, Mathematics and Environmental Studies, but the respondent had omitted to choose questions from the topics of Pedagogical Understanding, Communication Skill, Proficiency related to the medium of instruction in the last 4 subjects, besides the respondents had chosen questions from out of the syllabus, as such the structure and content of TET guidelines dated 11.02.2011 has not been followed by the Primary Board in conducting the TET. The very competent counsel further submits that one candidate namely Animesh Naskar who secured 33.6% marks in the Higher Secondary examination are allowed to appear in the TET examination. As per the Teachers’ Eligibility Test the minimum marks required for untrained candidates are at least 50% in 10+2 examination. But here the respondent had issued admit card for the said candidate to appear in the written examination and allowed such a candidate to appear in TET, as such there is a short coming by the respondent. 8. The very competent counsel further submits that the National Informatics Centre and West Bengal Board of Primary Education are not responsible for any inadvertent error. The Court thinks that the Board of Primary Education is solely responsible for any error being committed and as a result of any gross violation in the mode of selection. However, in the instant case the Board of Primary Education clearly shows that they have resorted to a lethargic and careless procedure. As per this Hon’ble Court in an earlier direction in the connected writ petition, that if any violation committed by the respondents then the trained candidates are at liberty to approach the Court regarding mode of selection, therefore the present writ petition has been filed before publication of results. 9. The Learned counsel further submits that as per the notification dated 01.04.2015 of Ministry of Human Resource and Development, the Senior Secondary pass candidates are to obtain at least 50% marks, are eligible to appear in TET under the relaxed condition. 9. The Learned counsel further submits that as per the notification dated 01.04.2015 of Ministry of Human Resource and Development, the Senior Secondary pass candidates are to obtain at least 50% marks, are eligible to appear in TET under the relaxed condition. The trained graduate candidates are also eligible but untrained graduate candidates having less than 50% in 10+2 examination are not at all eligible to appear for TET, but in the examination dated 11.10.2015 very many such ineligible candidates had appeared in the TET and have been selected in an arbitrary manner. Hence, the learned Counsel entreats the court to reserve 193 Assistant primary teacher posts for the petitioners without prejudicing the rights and contention of whomsoever until the disposal of the above writ petition. 10. The very competent A.A.G. Mr. L.K. Gupta appearing for the State submits that West Bengal Board of Primary Education has strictly followed the National Council for Teachers’ Education guidelines and have also strictly adhered to the notification condition dated 01.04.2015, which has been issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department. Therefore, the above writ petition is not maintainable since the trained candidates are not effective. As per this Hon’ble Court in an earlier order passed in the concerned writ petitions the selection process is proceeding. Hence, the very competent counsel makes a request to dismiss the above writ petition. The other learned counsel appearing for the respondents have adopted the arguments of the very competent Council Mr. L.K. Gupta. 11. Considering the actual facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the Learned Counsels on all sides and the views of this Court being :- (1) The Learned Counsel for the petitioners has produced a Xerox copy of the Admit Card in the name of Animesh Naskar and his Roll number is 09-5056342 along with his mark sheet, which clearly reveals that the candidates had obtained 33.6% in 10+2 examination, but as per the guidelines the minimum eligibility marks to appear in the TET is atleast 50% in 10+2 examination. As such, the ineligible candidate was allowed in the examination which was held on 11.10.2015. (2) The Learned Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the questions which were set up in the TET examination dated 11.10.2015 was not in accordance with the Structure and Content as prescribed in TET guidelines issued by the NCTE dated 11.02.2011. As such, the ineligible candidate was allowed in the examination which was held on 11.10.2015. (2) The Learned Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the questions which were set up in the TET examination dated 11.10.2015 was not in accordance with the Structure and Content as prescribed in TET guidelines issued by the NCTE dated 11.02.2011. In Language-I, Language-II, Mathematics and in Environmental Studies the topics for pedagogical understanding, communication skill abilities, to exchange the subjects between students and the teacher in a scientific mode has been deleted. This Court thinks it appropriate that NCTE being the Academic Authority is empowered under Section 23(1) of the RTE Act, 2009 and rules framed thereunder which is the appropriate authority to examine whether the issues raised by the petitioner in this writ petitioner is correct or not. Therefore, this Court hereby directs the NCTE being the respondent No.3 to scrutinise the question paper on the basis of which the TET examination was held on 11.10.2015 and submit a report in the form of Affidavit for presenting before this Hon’ble Court on or before the next date of hearing without fail. This Court further believes that NCTE being one of the Premier Academic Authority in the country shall examine the issues raised by the petitioners without being influenced by any State Machinery in any manner whatsoever. (3) The West Bengal Board of Primary Education had published the result as per this Court’s earlier order in the connected Writ Petitions dated 14.09.2016. The result reveals that the West Bengal Board of Primary Education does not take the responsibility for any error so committed. This sort of procedure clearly denotes a clear short coming besides the non-application of mind, which can only cause sufficient and reasonable apprehension in the minds of trained candidates. (4) The West Bengal Board of Primary Education had announced a notification regarding interview for the selection of candidates vide announcement dated 26.09.2016. The Board reveals that 42949 candidates will be selected, which means the West Bengal Board of Primary Education intends to appoint more candidates on the basis of an examination held on 11.10.2015. (4) The West Bengal Board of Primary Education had announced a notification regarding interview for the selection of candidates vide announcement dated 26.09.2016. The Board reveals that 42949 candidates will be selected, which means the West Bengal Board of Primary Education intends to appoint more candidates on the basis of an examination held on 11.10.2015. The West Bengal Board of Primary Education had not mentioned the vacancies available i.e. around 42949 at the time of obtaining relaxation, this current stand of the Educational Board runs against the notification dated 01.04.2015 pertaining to the extension of relaxation for a period of 1 year. Therefore, if the Education Board ought to have functioned on the initial request for fulfilling the strength of the actual vacancies but not in the current strength of the vacancies. As such the subsequent notification dated 26.09.2016 is inappropriate. However, in the interest of the mass general public this Court declines from interfering, on condition that the Respondents / West Bengal Board of Primary Education /other related Educational Authorities shall reserve the post of 193 Assistant Primary Teacher for the petitioners in their respective District Primary School Councils under which the petitioners reside as per cause title until further orders. (5) As per the Notification dated 24.09.2016 there are no crystal clear figures regarding reservation under the category of :- (1) Most backward, (2) Schedule Caste, (3) Schedule Tribe, (4) Exempted Category, (5) Physically Handicapped, etc. Therefore this Court directs to file consequential stages of the selection process from time to time as and when required by this Court. (6) The Respondent herein had filed the Counter Statement / Affidavit-in-Opposition, stating that as per the requisition made to the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department to grant relaxation under Section 23(2) of the RTE Act, 2009 and rules framed thereunder stating that in order to fulfil the vacancy of 35000 primary teachers in the entire State of West Bengal, since no adequate candidates are available under the category of trained candidates, therefore the strength of the trained candidates is 19495, but during the relevant period the existing vacancies were 35000. Accepting the same the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department had granted extension relaxation for a period of 1 year with effect from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016. Then the Respondents approached this Court to fill up 40000 vacancies. Accepting the same the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department had granted extension relaxation for a period of 1 year with effect from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016. Then the Respondents approached this Court to fill up 40000 vacancies. Now, the respondents have issued the notification dated 24.09.2016 wherein it reveals that 41559 vacancies are going to be filled up. Again on 26.09.2016 the respondents issued advertisement that 42949 vacancies is going to be filled up. The current stand runs against the initial stand as per the notification dated 01.04.2015. (7) This Court strongly feels that on the basis of this Court’s order passed in W.P. No.14548 (W) of 2016 and W.P. No.16797 (W) of 2016 dated 14.09.2016 granting liberty to the respondent to continue the selection process in order to fulfill the vacancies even after the expiry of the relaxation period, which was upto 31.03.2016, taking advantage of this, now the West Bengal Board of Primary Education is taking steps to appoint 42949 candidates consisting of trained and untrained candidates which is the bone of contention to the trained candidates, since the Board suo-moto increase vacancies of 7949 posts, which should be allotted to the trained candidates only. As per the original request vide letter dated 23.03.2015 for one year relaxation, as such there is a gross violation, which is the original cause of action. Now the respondents are doing an arbitrary mode of selection out of original cause of action. In prima-facie the notification dated 26.09.2016 is not sustainable as per law. (8) The Respondent / Education Board taking advantage of initial relaxation order dated 01.04.2015 granted by the Central Government, subsequently this Court permitted the Primary Education Board to continue the selection process, taking advantage of these two orders. Subsequently the Respondents suo moto increased the vacancies to 41559 posts by way of notification dated 24.09.2016. Again by another press notification which was published in daily newspapers namely “Sambad Pratidin” and “Bartaman” dated 26.09.2016 increased that to 42949 posts. This sort of administration and variation from time to time will cause injustice and prejudice to the trained candidates and also it is tantamount to violation of the conditions imposed by the Central Government at the time of granting relaxation dated 01.04.2015. The procedure adopted by the Primary Education Board is inappropriate. 12. This sort of administration and variation from time to time will cause injustice and prejudice to the trained candidates and also it is tantamount to violation of the conditions imposed by the Central Government at the time of granting relaxation dated 01.04.2015. The procedure adopted by the Primary Education Board is inappropriate. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the Learned Counsels on all sides perusing the current records of the writ petition and views of this Court as mentioned above 1 to 8, this Court directs the State Government / West Bengal Board of Primary Education and other related Educational Authorities to reserve 193 posts of Assistant Primary Teachers for the petitioners under their respective District Primary School Councils, under which the petitioners reside as per cause title until further orders. Post the above writ petition on 04.11.2016 before this Court, under the head of “Part Heard Matter”. 13. Accordingly ordered. 14. Urgent Photostat certified copies of this interim order if applied for, may be given to the Ld. Advocates for the parties.