108
CWP No.2968 of 2015 (O&M)
Seema Devi vs. State of Haryana and others
Present:
Mr. Jasbir Mor, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravi Pratap Singh, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate
for respondent No.6.
Mr. Girish Agnihotri, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Vijay Pal, Advocate
for the intervener.
Mr. T.C.Gupta, Principal Secretary
School Education Department, Haryana.
Ms. Sumedha Kataria, H.C.S.
Additional Director Secretary Education, Haryana.
***
In compliance of order dated 09.03.2015, Mr. T.C.Gupta,
Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Haryana, has put
in appearance and through Mr. Ravi Pratap Singh, AAG, Haryana,
filed a status report dated 16.03.2015, in the Court today and the
same is taken on record.
Mr. Gupta, has rendered assistance to this Court with
regard to the effective steps taken, after passing of the judgment in
CWP No.6090 of 2010 titled as Tilak Raj vs. The State of Haryana
and others.
Before adverting to the status report filed in the Court
today, this Court in previous order dated 09.03.2015, had called upon
the State to give the explanation on following five points:i)
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN
2015.03.24 11:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
No date of the order of the High Court vide
CWP No.2968 of 2015 (O&M)
-2-
which writ petition bearing No.12938 of 2014 was
disposed of has been mentioned.
ii)
No explanation has come forth with regard to the
steps have taken in December, 2014, when already
recommendations were made in August, 2014.
iii)
No explanation has come forth to explain the
termination of the remaining guest teachers out of total
number of 719 guest faculty teachers.
iv)
No details qua the guest faculty teachers, total
number 719 guest faculty teachers have been engaged in
violation of departmental policy/instructions i.e. 719-518.
v)
No explanation has come forth what steps have
been taken to fill up the regular posts of JBT/PRT and
drawing teachers and as well as C&V teachers.
As
regards
the
aforementioned
points,
the
following
explanation has been given:(i)
It has been explained that CWP No.12938 of 2014
titled as Maha Singh Buhrania vs. State of Haryana and
others, had been filing on apprehension that in pursuance
to the advertisement issued, the selection process has
been completed by the Haryana School Teachers
Selection
Board
but,
however,
before
issuing
appointment letters, necessary verification were not being
carried out by the State. The aforementioned writ petition
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN
2015.03.24 11:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
CWP No.2968 of 2015 (O&M)
-3-
was disposed of by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
vide order dated 6.8.2014, after noticing the contention of
learned counsel for the State that before issuing
appointment letters to the selected candidates, the
credential/technical verifications of each of the candidate
would be made.
ii)
As regards direction No.(ii), it has been stated in the
status report filed in the Court today, that a CWP No.346
of 2013 titled as Antim Kumari vs. State of Haryana and
others, along with other writ petitions had been filed to
consider petitioner (therein) eligible to the post of Primary
Teachers (PRTs) on the basis they attained the
qualification of Central Teachers Eligible Test (CTET) and
Haryana Teacher Eligibility Test (HTET) conducted in the
State of Haryana till 28.04.2013 and vide order dated
23.10.2013, as an interim measure, they have been
directed to be interviewed provisionally and the writ
petition is pending for 20.04.2015. Hon'ble Division Bench
of this Court has framed the question for consideration,
which are extracted herein below:“[i] whether the candidates who have qualified JBT/ETT
after 30.07.2011 and were in possession of all other
eligibility conditions as on the cut-off date mentioned in
the advertisement except the certificate of STET, which
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN
2015.03.24 11:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
CWP No.2968 of 2015 (O&M)
-4-
they could not obtain as no examination was held after
they acquired the minimum eligibility, can be deprived of
their right to compete?
[ii] Whether the candidates who have qualified CTET
during the year 2012 when no STET was held, are entitled
to claim eligibility for the advertised posts in terms of
guidelines issued by NCTE?
[iii] What would be the fate of candidates who acquired
JBT/ETT diploma after 30.07.2011, i.e., the date of
advertisement to appear for the STET and who have
qualified such tests in the very first opportunity given to
them on 26.06.2013 vide the advertisement dated
28.04.2013?”
The issue in the aforementioned writ petition is pertaining
to the appointment of JBT/PRT teachers.
Mr. T.C. Gupta, Principal Secretary has explained the
moment, the writ petition is decided in either way, further
process for appointment of JBT by drawing fresh merit list
would be undertaken as early as possible.
iii) and iv) It has been mentioned that vide order dated
09.01.2015 and 09.02.2015, services of 518 guest faculty
teachers has been dispensed with and remaining 200 are
continuing since their appointment had been found to be
based on genuine documents & they fulfilled requisite
qualification.
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN
2015.03.24 11:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
CWP No.2968 of 2015 (O&M)
v)
-5-
It has been informed that appointment of Trained
Graduate Teachers (TGT), the department on 11.03.2015
has sent a proposal to the State Government to dispense
with the services of 4073 guest faculty teachers who are
stated to be surplus. However, no process has been
initiated
for
appointing
regular
teachers
and
the
explanation is given is that in February, 2015, the
Government has relaxed the age in Government service
from 40 to 42 years and therefore, entire process has to
be started afresh and the same is position with regard to
appointment of PGT Teachers, though the process had
already
been
initiated
for
appointment
of
10114
candidates who have been issued appointment letters
and the appointment of 1222 candidates have been
withheld due to various reasons i.e. pending verification of
documents regarding the qualification, experience etc.
against requisition of 14216 candidates. It has been
further pointed out in the previous status report dated
8.3.2015 that department vide letter dated 20.4.2012 had
sent fresh requisition of 7036 posts of various categories
of PGT Teachers for direct quota
but, in view of the
circular issued by the Chief Secretary to Government
Haryana, entire process has to be initiated afresh.
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN
2015.03.24 11:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
CWP No.2968 of 2015 (O&M)
-6-
Mr. Gupta, has assured this Court that process qua
appointment of 7078 PGT & TGT teachers would be
initiated within a period of one week from today.
The controversy for appointment of JBT/PRT has been
kept in abeyance in view of pendency of CWP No.346 of 2013 and
other connected cases for 20.04.2015.
It has been brought to the notice of this Court that State
has specifically taken stand that w.e.f.1.4.2012, no fresh appointment
of guest faculty teacher would be made and has been made. Since
the Principal Secretary has assured this Court that process with
regard to appointment of PGT and TGT teachers, requisition shall be
sent within a period of one week from today, his presence in the
Court is dispensed with, at this stage.
Adjourned to 25.03.2015.
To be shown in the urgent list.
(AMIT RAWAL)
JUDGE
March 18, 2015
savita
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN
2015.03.24 11:35
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh