Ashish Kumar Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

¶1

-1-

¶2

2024:CGHC:30588

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 633 of 2014

¶6

Ashish Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Chaitram Sahu, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Oswal Line, Ward No. 32, Near Ganjpara School, Post and P.S. Basantpur, Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. State of Chhattisgarh, through The Secretary Department of Urban Administration Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Post and P. S. Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

2. Nagar Panchayat Patan, through Chief Municipal Officer, Patan, Post and P. S. Patan Distt. Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

3. Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat, Patan Post and P.S. Patan Distt. Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr. Sohail Afzal, Advocate, holding the brief of Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For State : Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, Panel Lawyer For Respondents No.2 & 3 : None

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶13

08.08.2024

¶14

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

¶15

“10.i. To kindly call for the records of the case from the respondents.

¶16

10.ii. To kindly quash the impugned order vide no.1193/shi.ka.ni./na/pa/2013-14 dated 06.01.2014 (Annexure P/1) issued by the respondent No.3 Chief Municipal Officer,, Nagar Panchayat Patan (C.G.).

¶17

10.iii. To kindly direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits.

¶18

10.iv. To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs of the petitioner. ”

¶19

-2-

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to an advertisement dated 10.05.2013 issued by respondent No. 2 for the post of Lecturers/Teacher/Assistant Teachers; the petitioner participated in the recruitment process of the Assistant Teacher (Municipal) as a member of Other Backward Category (OBC). He further submitted that the minimum qualification for the Assistant Teacher was Higher Secondary or its equivalent with a minimum of 50% marks and 4 years of Bachelor of Elementary Education (B. El. Ed.) or 2 years diploma in Elementary Education and passed in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). He also submitted that as per Rule 2-A of the Chhattisgarh Shikshak Nagriya Nikaya Samvarg (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013 (for short, the Rule, 2013); if no B.Ed./D.Ed. degree/diploma holder candidate is available then in that case, relaxation may be given but such candidate shall have to obtain the degree in B.EI.Ed/D.Ed. within 3 years from the date of his or her appointment. He contended that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher on 25.09.2013 and he had to acquire B.EI.Ed/D.Ed . within a period of 3 years from the date of his appointment. He further contended that the petitioner performed his duties with sincerity and honesty, but surprisingly, without the issuance of any show cause notice, respondent No. 3 issued the order of termination on 06.01.2014 on the ground that the petitioner did not have the requisite qualification i.e. B.EI.Ed/D.Ed at the time of his appointment. He also contended that when the rule provides for such relaxation, the authorities concerned cannot take a contrary decision. He argued that at present, the petitioner has already passed D.Ed. in the year 2017; thus, he prayed that the order 16.01.2014 (Annexure P/1) is liable to be quashed.

¶21

1. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose and submit that the petitioner did not have the requisite qualification. It is argued

¶22

-3-

¶23

that according to the Rules, 2013, a candidate must have a higher secondary with a minimum of 50 % marks and 4-year bachelor's degree in elementary education. She further argued that the minimum qualification is higher secondary and 4 years bachelor's degree in elementary education, which cannot be relaxed by the authorities. She also argued that due to a mistake, this deficiency was not detected by the authorities, but later on, during scrutiny, it was found that the petitioner did not have the requisite qualification at the time of appointment, and therefore, the order impugned was issued. It is further submitted that the petitioner acquired a D.Ed. Diploma in the year 2017, which shows that at the time of appointment, he did not have the requisite qualification, and such a diploma would not come to the rescue of the petitioner. She thus prayed that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶24

1. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on the record.

¶25

1. Clause ‘C’ of Annexure appended to the Rules, 2013 provides for the minimum qualification for Assistant Teacher (Municipal) which reads as under:-

¶26

(C) Minimum Qualification for Assistant Teacher (Municipal):-

¶27

(1) Higher Secondary (or its equivalent) with minimum 50% marks and degree in 4 years Bachelor in Elementary Education (B.EI.Ed.)

¶28

or

¶29

Higher Secondary with minimum 45% marks (or its equivalent) and which must have been obtained in accordance with National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition, Standards and Procedure) Regulations, 2002

¶30

or

¶31

Higher Secondary (or its equivalent) with minimum 50 % marks

¶32

or

¶33

Higher Secondary (or its equivalent) with minimum 50% marks and two years diploma in Education Science (Special Education) AND

¶34

(2) Passed in Teacher Eligibility Test (T.E.T.) to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the guidelines issued by the National Council for Teacher Education for this purpose.

¶35

Note-

¶36

1. Reservation Policy:- Relaxation upto 5% in the qualification marks shall be given to the candidates belonging to reserved categories such as Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes/Other Backward Classes/Physically

¶37

-4-

¶38

Disabled.

¶39

2. Relaxation in minimum educational qualification:- If in the appointment of Assistant Teacher (Municipal) and Teacher (Municipal) D.Ed. and B.Ed. holder candidates are not available then the following relaxation will be given:-

¶40

(a) For appointment to teach in class 1 to VIII, two year diploma, in Elementary Education Science (by whatever name known)

¶41

(b) For appointment to teach in class VI to VIII, one year degree in Elementary Education Science (by whatever name known)

¶42

Above relaxations shall be effective upto 3lst March, 2014. Due to such relaxation, appointed Teacher (Municipal) Cadre employees has to gain minimum qualification within two years of their appointment…..”

¶43

1. From a bare perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is apparent that in the absence of requisite qualification i.e. B.Ed./D. Ed., other candidates can be appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher, with a condition that such candidate has to obtain the degree/diploma in B.EI.Ed/D.Ed. within 3 years from the date of appointment.

¶44

1. In the present case, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher on 25.09.2013; it is not in dispute that the petitioner did not have a B.EI.Ed/D.Ed. qualification; further, point-11 of the appointment order dated 25.09.2013 would show that the candidates who have not obtained B.EI.Ed/D.Ed. may acquire such qualification within a period of 2/3 years according to the Rules, 2013.

¶45

1. The petitioner worked till 06.1.2014 and on that date, an order was issued by respondent No. 3 therein cancelling the appointment order of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner did not have the requisite qualification of B.EI.Ed/D.Ed . on the date of appointment.

¶46

1. Clause 2-A of Annexure “C” appended to the Rules, 2013 and one of the conditions of the appointment order permits the candidate to acquire B.EI.Ed/D.Ed. diploma within 2/3 years from the date of appointment and such

¶47

-5-

¶48

liberty cannot be curtailed by the authorities dehors the rule.

¶49

1. In the present case, the authority concerned without examining the applicable Rules, took a decision to cancel the appointment of the petitioner which is contrary to the Rules, 2013, and one of the conditions of the appointment order, therefore, the order dated 06.01.2014 is not sustainable in the eyes of law, and the same is liable to be and is hereby quashed .

¶50

1. It is informed that at present, the petitioner has acquired the requisite qualification for the Assistant Teacher (Municipal) i.e. D.Ed. Taking into consideration the aforesaid development, the authorities are directed to permit the petitioner to join the services.

¶51

1. With regard to the arrears of salary and other benefits, the petitioner would be at liberty to make a suitable representation before respondents No. 2 & 3 and the same would be considered and decided by the authorities strictly in accordance with the law.

¶52

1. Accordingly, the present writ petition is hereby allowed .

¶53

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶54

Nadim

¶55

Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE

Ashish Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Singh Baghel And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Dayashankar Mahobia Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Shiv Pratap Singh And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Ashwani Kumar Dhurw Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Kumari Manorama Bharti Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Smt.urvashi Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.