TET SARKARI NAUKRI News -
SUPREME COURT ON TET TEACHER MATTER ISSUE FOR RAJASTHAN TEACHER SELECTION - JUDGEMENT - HIGHLIGHT OF DECISION >>>
DECISION WAS ANNOUNCED ON 20TH MAY 2011 >>>>
GRADUATION / MASTERS DEGREE MEIN 45% MARKS VAALON KO BHEE CHOOT MILEE HAI TET KARNE KE LIYE, AGAR UNHONE ADMISSION NCTE KE NOTIFICATION KE AANE SE PEHLE AUR USKE QUALIFICATION KE ANUROOP LIYA HAI
QUESTIONS ARISES >>>>
*******************
IMPORTANT POINTS CONSIDERED >>>
(1) of the Act of 2009 had laid down the minimum qualifications for being eligible for appointment as Teacher in Class I to VIII in a school referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act of 2009. Such Notification could not have been issued in view of availability of persons under section 23. It could have been done only in cases where there are no adequate institutions offering course or training in teacher education are available with the State Government
******************
NCTE KO KENDRA SARKAR /RTE ACT DWARA QUALIFICATION TAY KARNE KE LIYE ADHIKRAT KIYAA GAYAA HAI >>>
The guidelines for conducting TET as contained in P/6 provides that the implementation of the Act of 2009 requires the recruitment of a large number of teachers. It is necessary to ensure that persons recruited as teachers possess the essential aptitude and ability to meet the challenges of teaching at the primary and upper primary level Class I to VIII. Section 23 (1) of the Act of 2009 provides for minimum qualifications as laid down by the Academic Authority, authorized by the Central Government by notification. NCTE has been authorized by the Central Government to lay down minimum qualifications and vide notification dated 23rd August, 2010, NCTE has notified minimum qualifications, which are essential for teaching in any school as referred to in clause (n) of section 2 of the Act of 2009. It is necessary that incumbent
should pass TET which will be conducted by the appropriate
Government.
*******
****************************
RTE ACT KE AANE SE PEHLE NCTE REGULATION 2001 FOLLOW KIYA JAYEGAA >>
*******************
2009 KE NOTIFICATION MEIN GRADUATE WITH 50% MARKS QUALIFICATION PRESCRIBE KEE GAYEE HAI >>>
In the Notification dated 31.8.2009, the eligibility criteria laid down was to the effect that candidates with atleast 50% marks either in the Bachelor's Degree and/or in the Master's degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, were eligible for admission to the programme.
*************
27TH SEPTEMBER KE NOTIFICATION MEIN BACHELOR DEGREE YA FIR MASTERS DEGREE MEIN 45% MARKS KI QUALIFICATION PRESCRIBED KEE GAYEE HAI
having 45% marks either in the Bachelor's Degree or in the Master's degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, were eligible for admission with effect from 27.9.2007 and 50% marks with effect from 31.8.2009
***********************
The implementation of the Act of 2009 requires recruitment of large number of teachers and it is desirable to ensure that quality requirement for recruitment of teachers are not diluted at any cost and thus, it is necessary to ensure that persons recruited as teachers possess the essential aptitude
, it has been considered appropriate to ensure that the children, who are future of the Nation, are efficiently taught by the qualified incumbents and for that if TET was prescribed, such prescription cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary or impermissible at al
******************
open to the NCTE to lay down such qualifications and they cannot be circumvented by the petitioners in the manner they have suggested. They are bound by the qualifications prescribed in the notification dated 23.8.2010. Only in case they had obtained admission in the requisite course prior to 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 as the case may be, without violating the norms of NCTE, they can be permitted to appear in the TET not otherwise. In case they have not taken admission in the requisite course prior to 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 and they were not having minimum percentage and qualifications as prescribed vide notifications dated 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 even though such qualifications were not applicable in Jammu and Kashmir
*********************
The learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon the decision of Allahabad High Court in Kanhiya Lal V/s State of UP and ors. (decided on 5th January, 2010) in which Allahabad High Court has observed that there was valid reason for not treating incumbents obtaining degree from Jammu & Kashmir eligible for admission for Special B.T.C. Course. If the Government decides that such educational qualification, which fulfil the minimum standard set by NCTE would be valid qualification for admission in Special B.T.C. the decision of the Government cannot be treated to be per se illegal as the Bar created in NCTE Act admittedly applies to the State of UP.
********************
UP GOVT NE D ED KO BTC KE EQUIVALAENTIN NAHIN MANA THAA,
SUPREME COURT NE KAHA KI YE RAJYA KA POLICY DECISION HAI.
SUPREME COURT TABHEE HASTAKSHEP KAR SKATEE HAI JAB KAHIN STATUTORY POLICY YA CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION KA VIOLATION HO RAHA HO >>>>>
*************************
45% MARKS VS 50% MARKS IN GRADUATION KE MAMLE MEIN SUPREME COURT NE KAHA KEEE AGAR ADMISSION NOTIFICATION KI DATE SE PEHLE LIYA HO TAB AAPKO RAHAT MIL SAKTEE HAI >>>
JO TEACHER RTE ACT NOTIFICATION KE AANE SE PEHLE KAAM KAR RAHE HAIN, UNKE LIYE NCTE 1 MAHINE KE ANDAR BATAYE KI KISKO CHOOT MIL SAKTEE HAI AUR KISKO NAHIN >>>>>>>>>>>>
we direct the NCTE to specify in State of Rajasthan categories of Teachers, which are exempted as per para 4 of the said Notification. Let it be done within a period of one month
(A) Whether in absence of any eligibility or qualification in the rules the State Government can be permitted to conduct TET without amending the service rules made under Article 309,Constitution of India on the basis of notification dated 23.08.2010 which the Division Bench held vide order dated 13.4.2011 that it is not statutory in character?
***************************
(B) Whether in view of the fact that stay order was in existence on 06.05.2011 upon conducting the TET in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3749/2011 an order for modifying the order dated 15.4.2011 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3068/2011 could be made allowing the State Government to go ahead with conducting the TET examination?
(C) Whether once opinion is expressed by the Division Bench that notification dated 23.8.2010 is not statutory in character, the learned Single Bench can pass order permitting the State Government to conduct TET examination which is not even enumerated in the service rules as eligibility or qualification on the basis of notification dated 23.8.2010 which is admittedly found to be administrative instruction by the Division Bench?
-----------
RTE ACT EK KANOONEE PRAVDHAN HAI NA KI KOEE PRSASHNIK
NIRDESH. IS ACT ARTHAAT KANOON KA PAALAN KARNA HEE HAI
************************************
(D) Whether in absence of eligibility prescribed in the rules the State Government will suffer any irreparable injury in not conducting TET till adjudication of the matter and whether while conducting TET and declaring any candidate unsuccessful and thereby denying consideration for appointment on the post of Teacher under the existing rules is legal?
(E) Whether the State Government can withhold recruitment on the ground that first they will conduct TET and thereafter proceed for prescribing qualification in the rules?”
UPTET /RTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
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
SUPREME COURT ON TET TEACHER MATTER ISSUE FOR RAJASTHAN TEACHER SELECTION - JUDGEMENT - HIGHLIGHT OF DECISION >>>
DECISION WAS ANNOUNCED ON 20TH MAY 2011 >>>>
GRADUATION / MASTERS DEGREE MEIN 45% MARKS VAALON KO BHEE CHOOT MILEE HAI TET KARNE KE LIYE, AGAR UNHONE ADMISSION NCTE KE NOTIFICATION KE AANE SE PEHLE AUR USKE QUALIFICATION KE ANUROOP LIYA HAI
QUESTIONS ARISES >>>>
“(A) Whether in absence of any eligibility or qualification
in the rules the State Government can be permitted to conduct TET without amending
the service rules made under Article 309,Constitution of India on the basis of notification
dated 23.08.2010 which the Division Bench held vide order dated 13.4.2011 that
it is not statutory in character?
(B) Whether in view of the fact that stay order was in
existence on 06.05.2011 upon conducting the TET in S.B.Civil Writ Petition
No.3749/2011 an order for modifying the order dated 15.4.2011 passed in
S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3068/2011 could be made allowing the State
Government to go ahead with conducting the TET examination?
(C) Whether once opinion is expressed by the Division Bench
that notification dated 23.8.2010 is not statutory in character, the learned
Single Bench can pass order permitting the State Government to conduct TET
examination which is not even enumerated in the service rules as eligibility or
qualification on the basis of notification dated 23.8.2010 which is admittedly found
to be administrative instruction by the Division Bench?
(D) Whether in absence of eligibility prescribed in the
rules the State Government will suffer any irreparable injury in not conducting
TET till adjudication of the matter and whether while conducting TET and
declaring any candidate unsuccessful and thereby denying consideration for
appointment on the post of Teacher under the existing rules is legal?
(E) Whether the State Government can withhold recruitment on
the ground that first they will conduct TET and thereafter proceed for prescribing
qualification in the rules?”
*******************
IMPORTANT POINTS CONSIDERED >>>
(1) of the Act of 2009 had laid down the minimum qualifications for being eligible for appointment as Teacher in Class I to VIII in a school referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act of 2009. Such Notification could not have been issued in view of availability of persons under section 23. It could have been done only in cases where there are no adequate institutions offering course or training in teacher education are available with the State Government
******************
NCTE KO KENDRA SARKAR /RTE ACT DWARA QUALIFICATION TAY KARNE KE LIYE ADHIKRAT KIYAA GAYAA HAI >>>
The guidelines for conducting TET as contained in P/6 provides that the implementation of the Act of 2009 requires the recruitment of a large number of teachers. It is necessary to ensure that persons recruited as teachers possess the essential aptitude and ability to meet the challenges of teaching at the primary and upper primary level Class I to VIII. Section 23 (1) of the Act of 2009 provides for minimum qualifications as laid down by the Academic Authority, authorized by the Central Government by notification. NCTE has been authorized by the Central Government to lay down minimum qualifications and vide notification dated 23rd August, 2010, NCTE has notified minimum qualifications, which are essential for teaching in any school as referred to in clause (n) of section 2 of the Act of 2009. It is necessary that incumbent
should pass TET which will be conducted by the appropriate
Government.
*******
Teacher
appointed before the date of this Notification.- The following categories of teachers
appointed for classes I to VIII prior to date of this Notification need not
acquire the minimum qualifications specified in Para (i) above.
(a) A teacher appointed on or after the 3rd September,
2001 i.e. the date on which the NCTE (Determination of Minimum Qualifications
for Recruitment of Teachers in Schools) Regulations, 2001 (as amended from time
to time) came into force, in accordance with that Regulation.
Provided that a teacher of class I to V possessing B.Ed.
Qualification, or a teacher possessing B.Ed. (Special education) or D.Ed.
(Special Education) qualification shall undergo an NCTE recognized 6- month
special programme on elementary education.
(b) A teacher of class I to V with B.Ed. Qualification who
has completed a 6-month Special Basic Teacher Course (Special BTC) approved by
the NCTE.
(c) A teacher appointed before the 3rd September, 2001, in
accordance with the prevalent Recruitment Rules.
****************************
RTE ACT KE AANE SE PEHLE NCTE REGULATION 2001 FOLLOW KIYA JAYEGAA >>
Teacher
appointed after the date of this Notification in certain cases.- Where an appropriate
Government or local authority or a school has issued an advertisement to
initiate the process of appointment of teachers prior to the date of this
Notification, such appointments may be made in accordance with the NCTE
(Determination of Minimum Qualifications for Recruitment of Teachers in
Schools) Regulations, 2001 (as amended from time to time).
*******************
2009 KE NOTIFICATION MEIN GRADUATE WITH 50% MARKS QUALIFICATION PRESCRIBE KEE GAYEE HAI >>>
In the Notification dated 31.8.2009, the eligibility criteria laid down was to the effect that candidates with atleast 50% marks either in the Bachelor's Degree and/or in the Master's degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, were eligible for admission to the programme.
*************
27TH SEPTEMBER KE NOTIFICATION MEIN BACHELOR DEGREE YA FIR MASTERS DEGREE MEIN 45% MARKS KI QUALIFICATION PRESCRIBED KEE GAYEE HAI
having 45% marks either in the Bachelor's Degree or in the Master's degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, were eligible for admission with effect from 27.9.2007 and 50% marks with effect from 31.8.2009
***********************
The implementation of the Act of 2009 requires recruitment of large number of teachers and it is desirable to ensure that quality requirement for recruitment of teachers are not diluted at any cost and thus, it is necessary to ensure that persons recruited as teachers possess the essential aptitude
, it has been considered appropriate to ensure that the children, who are future of the Nation, are efficiently taught by the qualified incumbents and for that if TET was prescribed, such prescription cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary or impermissible at al
******************
open to the NCTE to lay down such qualifications and they cannot be circumvented by the petitioners in the manner they have suggested. They are bound by the qualifications prescribed in the notification dated 23.8.2010. Only in case they had obtained admission in the requisite course prior to 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 as the case may be, without violating the norms of NCTE, they can be permitted to appear in the TET not otherwise. In case they have not taken admission in the requisite course prior to 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 and they were not having minimum percentage and qualifications as prescribed vide notifications dated 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 even though such qualifications were not applicable in Jammu and Kashmir
*********************
The learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon the decision of Allahabad High Court in Kanhiya Lal V/s State of UP and ors. (decided on 5th January, 2010) in which Allahabad High Court has observed that there was valid reason for not treating incumbents obtaining degree from Jammu & Kashmir eligible for admission for Special B.T.C. Course. If the Government decides that such educational qualification, which fulfil the minimum standard set by NCTE would be valid qualification for admission in Special B.T.C. the decision of the Government cannot be treated to be per se illegal as the Bar created in NCTE Act admittedly applies to the State of UP.
********************
UP GOVT NE D ED KO BTC KE EQUIVALAENTIN NAHIN MANA THAA,
SUPREME COURT NE KAHA KI YE RAJYA KA POLICY DECISION HAI.
SUPREME COURT TABHEE HASTAKSHEP KAR SKATEE HAI JAB KAHIN STATUTORY POLICY YA CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION KA VIOLATION HO RAHA HO >>>>>
The
respondent admittedly got appointment after the Circular dated 11.8.1997 and
hence this circular applies to him. Admittedly, the respondent does not possess
the qualification mentioned in the said circular. He does not either possess
BTC, Hindustani Teaching Certificate, JCT or Certificate of Teaching. The DEd
Certificate is no longer regarded as equivalent to BTC after the Circular dated
11.8.1997. This was a policy decision of the U.P. Government, and it is well settled
that the court cannot interfere with policy decision of the Government unless
it is in violation of some statutory or constitutional provision. Hence, we are
of the opinion that the respondent was not entitled to be appointed as Assistant
Master of a junior basic school in U.P.15. Grant of equivalence and/or
revocation of equivalence is an administrative decision which is in the sole
discretion of the authority concerned, and the court has nothing to do with
such matters.
The matter
of equivalence is decided by experts appointed by the Government, and the court
does not have expertise in such matters. Hence, it should exercise judicial
restraint and not interfere in it.”
*************************
45% MARKS VS 50% MARKS IN GRADUATION KE MAMLE MEIN SUPREME COURT NE KAHA KEEE AGAR ADMISSION NOTIFICATION KI DATE SE PEHLE LIYA HO TAB AAPKO RAHAT MIL SAKTEE HAI >>>
notifications dated 27.9.2007 and 31.8.2009. In case they
obtained admission before the said dates in the requisite courses in Jammu
& Kashmir, obviously their qualification would be recognized and they can
stake their claim in the TET otherwise not.
************************JO TEACHER RTE ACT NOTIFICATION KE AANE SE PEHLE KAAM KAR RAHE HAIN, UNKE LIYE NCTE 1 MAHINE KE ANDAR BATAYE KI KISKO CHOOT MIL SAKTEE HAI AUR KISKO NAHIN >>>>>>>>>>>>
we direct the NCTE to specify in State of Rajasthan categories of Teachers, which are exempted as per para 4 of the said Notification. Let it be done within a period of one month
Coming to
the submission raised by the petitioners that as they are already working as
Teachers, they should be exempted from appearing in the TET. With respect to
the aforesaid prayer, provision has been made in para 4 of the Notification
dated 23rd August, 2010, which provides that categories of teachers mentioned
in para 4(a) to (c) appointed for classes I to VIII prior to date of this
Notification need not acquire the minimum qualifications specified in para (1)
of the said Notification. Para 4(a) provides a teacher appointed on or after
the 3rd September, 2001 i.e. the date on which the NCTE (Determination of Minimum
Qualifications for Recruitment of Teachers in Schools) Regulations, 2001 (as
amended from time to time) came into force, in accordance with that Regulation.
Provided that a teacher of class I to V possessing B.Ed. qualification, or a
teacher possessing B.Ed. (Special education) or D.Ed. (Special Education)
qualification shall undergo an NCTE recognized 6-month special programme on
elementary education. Para 4 (b) provides a teacher of class I to V with B.Ed.
Qualification who has completed a 6-month Special Basic Teacher Course (Special
BTC) approved by the NCTE. Para 4(c) provides a teacher appointed before the
3rd September, 2001, in accordance with the prevalent Recruitment Rules. In
case the petitioners fall in the aforesaid categories of teachers, obviously
they are not supposed to undergo TET. Since there are various kind of teachers
appointed under the Rules in Rajasthan, we direct the NCTE to specify in State
of Rajasthan categories of Teachers, which are exempted as per para 4 of the
said Notification. Let it be done within a period of one month.
***************************(A) Whether in absence of any eligibility or qualification in the rules the State Government can be permitted to conduct TET without amending the service rules made under Article 309,Constitution of India on the basis of notification dated 23.08.2010 which the Division Bench held vide order dated 13.4.2011 that it is not statutory in character?
“Answer to question (A):-
The State Government has amended the Service Rules and even
otherwise, in our opinion, as Notification
dated 23rd August, 2010 was having statutory force of Section 23(1) of the Act
of 2009, it was open to the NCTE to prescribe holding of TET even without
amending the Service Rules. However, as already stated, Rajasthan Punchayati Raj
Rules,1996 have been amended vide notification dated 11.5.2011. Thus,
question (A) stands answered accordingly.
----------------
RAJASTHAN PANCHAYTEE RAJ NE RTE ACT KO APPNA LIYAA, ISLEEYE KOEE SAMASYA NAIN HAI
***************************
(B) Whether in view of the fact that stay order was in existence on 06.05.2011 upon conducting the TET in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3749/2011 an order for modifying the order dated 15.4.2011 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3068/2011 could be made allowing the State Government to go ahead with conducting the TET examination?
Answer to question (B):-
The question (B) has assumed academic significance as we
have heard the matters and decided the same on merits by this common order.
****************************(C) Whether once opinion is expressed by the Division Bench that notification dated 23.8.2010 is not statutory in character, the learned Single Bench can pass order permitting the State Government to conduct TET examination which is not even enumerated in the service rules as eligibility or qualification on the basis of notification dated 23.8.2010 which is admittedly found to be administrative instruction by the Division Bench?
Answer to question (C)-
As to question (C), we are of the opinion that
since Notification dated 23rd August, 2010 was issued under section 23(1) of
the Act of 2009, therefore, it has statutory force. Apart from this, the State
Government has amended the Service Rules. Even otherwise, it was open to the NCTE
to prescribe conducting of TET. The notification dated 23.8.2010 cannot be said
to be administrative instructions, it has legislative force. The prescription
of eligibility qualifications has statutory force.-----------
RTE ACT EK KANOONEE PRAVDHAN HAI NA KI KOEE PRSASHNIK
NIRDESH. IS ACT ARTHAAT KANOON KA PAALAN KARNA HEE HAI
************************************
(D) Whether in absence of eligibility prescribed in the rules the State Government will suffer any irreparable injury in not conducting TET till adjudication of the matter and whether while conducting TET and declaring any candidate unsuccessful and thereby denying consideration for appointment on the post of Teacher under the existing rules is legal?
Answer to question (D)-
The question (D) has been rendered unnecessary in view of
the final decision being rendered by us. Apart from this, the question has assumed
academic importance as the Service Rules has been amended prescribing
conducting of TET.
Holding of TET is necessary for manning the teachers in the
various schools at large. Thus, non-holding of TET would be detrimental to the public
interest as primary and upper primary schools cannot be left without qualified
teachers which is dependent upon holding of TET. Hence, holding of TET is
necessary for the interest of the children.
***************************(E) Whether the State Government can withhold recruitment on the ground that first they will conduct TET and thereafter proceed for prescribing qualification in the rules?”
Answer to question (E)
As already stated above, holding of TET is necessary for the
recruitment to be made in the schools. Thus, there is no question of State Government
withholding recruitment as after TET, recruitment is open to be made.
For the reasons stated above, the interim stay is vacated.
The respondents are free to hold the TET examination. The prayer of the
petitioners regarding inclusion of qualification of B.Com. in the group of qualification
of graduation in the eligibility criteria has already been allowed. The
respondents shall not insist on the qualification of having 45% or 50% marks,
as the case may be, in the bachelor's degree or master's degree etc. or any
other equivalent qualification, in case incumbents have obtained admission in
the requisite courses such as B.A., B.Com., B.Sc., B.Ed., B.El.Ed, Senior
Secondary etc. prior to prescription of the minimum qualifying marks by NCTE vide
notifications dated 27.9.2007 and 31.8.2009. It is made clear that the
incumbents, who have obtained the B.Ed. etc. before the minimum qualifications
were prescribed vide notifications dated 27.9.2007 and 31.8.2009, shall be
allowed to appear in the TET Examination. The incumbents, who have passed out
B.Ed. Course from Jammu & Kashmir, have to be dealt with on similar yard
sticks in case the qualification is otherwise recognized. Let NCTE specify
categories of teachers under para 4 of Notification dated 23.8.2010. As prayed
by NCTE, let amended notification be issued within one month covering aforesaid
aspects.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petitions stand
disposed of accordingly. The stay applications also stand disposed.
*********************************UPTET /RTET / टीईटी / TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates / Teacher Recruitment / शिक्षक भर्ती / SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS
UP-TET 2011, 72825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
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
