Monday, June 4, 2012

Jodhpur High court Rajasthan : TET a Mandatory Qualification to be appointed as Primary / Upper Primary Teacher


Jodhpur High court Rajasthan : TET a Mandatory Qualification to be appointed as Primary / Upper Primary Teacher

See various details/relaxations demanded by petitioners  from NCTE Guidelines to be appointed as teacher for RTE implementations


Sushil Sompura & Ors vs State (Education ) & Ors. on 20 May, 2011
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

1. D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3964/2011

Sushil Sompura & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

2. D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2584/2011

Mahendra Singh & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

3. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3061/2011 Narayan Lal & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

4. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3205/2011

Pawan Kumar & Anr. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

5. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3210/2011 Shaitan Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

6. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3223/2011 Vijaylakshmi Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

7. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3224/2011 Jeevan Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

8. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3225/2011 Sangeeta Hada Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

9. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3249/2011

Narendra Kumar Delu & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

10. D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3258/2011

Asu Ram Jatiya & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

11. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3261/2011

Jai Kishan Saharan & ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

12. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3267/2011

Deena Ram & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

13. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3273/2011

Govind Singh & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

14. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3274/2011

Mahesh Dave & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & ors.

15. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3275/2011

Mahaveer Prasad Bagerwal & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

16. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3277/2011

Ghewar Singh Rathore & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

17. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3280/2011

Ugam Singh & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

2

18. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3282/2011

Rakesh Kumar Utreja & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

19. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3283/2011

Raj Kumar Joshi Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

20. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3284/2011

Sunil Kumar Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

21. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3286/2011

Hari Om Sharma & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

22. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3290/2011

Gajendra Singh Ranawat & ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

23. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3318/2011

Seema Jalori & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & ors.

24. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3320/2011

Sahadev Ram & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

25. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3321/2011

Ved Prakash & ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & ors.

26. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3324/2011

Pawan Kumar Pareek & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

27. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3327/2011

Jagram & Ors. Vs. State (Ele. Education) & Ors.

28. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3331/2011

Bhupendra & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

29. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3341/2011

Sanjay Kumar & ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

30. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3342/2011

Deen Dayal Sharma & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

31. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3390/2011

Tarun Paliwal & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & ors.

32. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3696/2011

Susheela Kumari & Anr. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

33. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3848/2011

Narna Ram & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

34. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3913/2011

Umed Singh & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

35. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4105/2011

Bharat Kamliya (Salvi) & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors. 3

36. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4106/2011

Akram Ansari & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

37. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4108/2011

Maniram & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

38. D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4403/2011

Laxman Lal Patel & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

39. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4416/2011

Hanuman Singh Rathore Vs. State (Edu.) & Ors.

40. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4417/2011

Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & ors.

41. D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4421/2011

Vijender Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs. State (Edu.) & ors.

42. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4436/2011

Maha Prakash Sharma & Os. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

43. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4444/2011

Mangu Singh Bhati & Anr. Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Date of Order : : 20.05.2011 PRESENT

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ARUN MISHRA

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI

Mr.P.R.Mehta ]

Mr.P.S.Chundawat ]

Mr.Shambhoo Singh ]

Mr.S.R.Godara ]

Mr.Narpat Singh ]

Mr.H.S.Sidhu ]

Mr.G.R.Bhari ]

Mr.Vishwajeet Joshi ]

Mr.D.S.Sodha ]

Mr.Awar Dan Charan ]

Mr.Trilok Joshi ]

Mr.Pankaj Sharma ]

Mr.Tribhuva Gupta ]

Mr.V.N.Kalla ]-for the petitioners. Mr.Sandeep Saruparia ]

Mr.Sunil Beniwal ]

Mr.R.S.Charan ]

Mr.Sukesh Bhati ]

Mr.Vijay Raj Bishnoi ]

Mr.R.C.Joshi ]

Mr.V.R.Choudhary ]

Mr.Manoj Purohit ]

Mr.Manish Patel ]

Mr.O.P.Kumawat ]

Mr.Rohitash Singh ]

Mr.Vikas Bijarnia ]

Mr.B.S.Sandhu ]

Mr.Sumer Singh ]

Mr.Anand Purohit, AAG ]

4

Mr.Kuldeep Mathur ]

Mr.K.R.Bishnoi ]

Mr.D.S.Gaur ]

Mr.Rakesh Arora ]- for the respondents. ORDER

BY THE COURT (Per Hon'ble Arun Mishra, CJ) In these writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for relief to quash the Gazettee Notification dated 23rd August, 2010 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as "the NCTE") in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2009") laying down minimum qualifications to be eligible for appointment as a Teacher in Class I to VIII in a school referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act of 2009.

Prayer has also been been made by the petitioners to quash the condition of having minimum 45% or 50% marks in graduation. In some of the matters, prayer has been made to include the qualification of B.Com. also in graduation. Prayer has also been made to declare that the Notification dated 23.8.2010 shall operate prospectively. In some of the petitions, the petitioners have prayed that as they have passed graduation from the University in Jammu and Kashmir, the respondents be directed to ignore the minimum percentage in the graduation. Prayer has also been made in some of the petitions that Vidhyarthi Mitra and Serva Shiksha Karmik (CRCF) may not be compelled to qualify the Teacher Eligibility Test (hereinafter referred to as "the TET").

The reference has been made by the Single Bench to 5 the Division Bench in Writ Petition No.3964/2011 Sushil Sompura & ors. V/s State of Rajasthan & ors. vide order dated 9th May, 2011. The following questions have been referred for adjudication by Division Bench:- "(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?"

It appears that there are conflicting opinion expressed by the Single Benches whether the cases are required to be heard by Single Bench or Division Bench. There are also conflicting orders of interim stay granted in different matters by different Benches, as such, cases have been referred to the Division Bench. Considering the fact that the Notification dated 23.8.2010, which has been issued by the NCTE, is under section 23(1) of the Act of 2009, we have directed for listing of all the petitions before the Division Bench and have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties on merits of the cases including questions which have been referred and they are being decided by this common order.

It is averred in Writ Petition No.3964/2011 that the petitioners have qualified three years degree course of graduation from respective colleges/university and thereafter, they have completed B.Ed. Course. Some of them have been appointed as Vidhyarthi Mitra under the Scheme introduced by the State Government for the purpose of teaching students of primary, upper primary, secondary and senior secondary schools. One incumbent is working on the post of CRCF in the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. It is further averred that the NCTE vide Notification dated 23.8.2010 issued under section 23 (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. TET will be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE as per communication P/4 dated 11.2.2011 issued by the Member Secretary, NCTE.

The State Government issued advertisement alongwith guidelines dated 30th March, 2011 for conducting TET and last date for submitting application was 18.4.2011 and the date of examination was fixed as 22.5.2011. It has been prescribed that 50% marks in B.A., B.Sc. are compulsory for appearing in TET examination, 2011 whereas the petitioners were allowed to appear in B.Ed. Course on the basis of marks obtained by them in graduation irrespective of the fact whether they have secured the marks more than 50% or below 50%. Thus, their degree of B.Ed. are being de-recognized with retrospective effect by imposing rider of certain percentage in the graduation (B.A., B.Sc. etc.). It is also submitted that as the petitioners are working as Vidhyarthi Mitra for several years, as such, they are not required to qualify TET examination. They should have been exempted from appearing in the TET examination. It is also submitted by the petitioners that as per the prevailing Rules of Recruitment in Rajasthan, the recruitment of teacher Gr.III is through RPSC or recruitment under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 or the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Rules 1971 and they do not provide holding of TET. Thus, action of holding TET examination is contrary to the Recruitment Rules. In some of the petitions, prayer has been made to treat the qualification of B.Com. in the graduation, which has been accepted by NCTE and B.Com. has been included in the group of qualification of graduation in the eligibility criteria. To that extent, prayer of the petitioners stands satisfied.

In some of the petitions, prayer has been made by the petitioners that as they have passed B.Ed. Examination from Jammu and Kashmir where there is no applicability of eligibility criteria specified by NCTE, as such, irrespective of their percentage in the graduation etc., they should be permitted to participate in the TET.

The relief prayed by the petitioners stands satisfied in view of the agreement expressed on behalf of NCTE to the effect that in case they have passed B.A, B.Sc., B.Com., Senior Secondary or its equivalent qualification and obtained admission in the requisite courses such as B.Ed., B.El.Ed. D.Ed. etc. as mentioned in para-1 of the Notification dated 23.8.2010, prior to the prescription of the minimum qualifying marks by NCTE in Bachelor's degree or Master's Degree etc. or any other qualification equivalent thereto vide notifications dated 27.9.2007 and 31.8.2009, the minimum 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, shall not be insisted as stated by Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NCTE on being instructed by Regional Director, NCTE. Thus, the major grievance of the petitioners that their qualifications of B.Ed. B.El.Ed. etc. mentioned in para 1 are being de- recognized with retrospective effect when there was no prescription of minimum qualifying marks of 45% or 50%, as the case may be, stands redressed in view of the statement made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NCTE.

It has been further stated by the learned counsel for the NCTE that for the first time, de-novo qualifications were prescribed by the NCTE vide Notification dated 27.9.2007 and further, qualifications were prescribed vide Notification dated 31.8.2009 and in case admission has been taken by the incumbents in any of the courses of B.Ed. B.El.Ed. etc. as mentioned in para-1 of the Notification dated 23.8.2010 prior to aforesaid dates, they shall not insist for having 45% or 50% marks, as the case may be, in qualifying examination for aforesaid courses. Thus, respondents have to allow aforesaid incumbents in TET examination, 2011. Coming to the question of surviving reliefs, it is submitted that notification dated 23.8.2010 is illegal, arbitrary and ulra vires the Constitution. It is not necessary and it is repugnant to the Rules of Service in the State. 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. The rationale for including TET as one of the minimum qualifications is quoted below:-

"3. The rationale for including the TET as a minimum qualification for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher is as under:-


 i. It would bring national standards and benchmark of teacher quality in the recruitment process;


ii. It would induce teacher education institutions and students from these institutions to further improve their performance standards;


iii. It would send a positive signal to all stakeholders that the Government lays special emphasis on teacher quality."


Section 23 of the Act of 2009 which is enabling provision for prescription of the qualifications is quoted below:-


"23. Qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.- (1) Any person possessing such minimum qualifications, as laid down by an academic authority, authorized by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher.


(2) Where a State does not have adequate institutions offering courses or training in teacher education, or teachers possessing minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-section (1) are not available in sufficient numbers, the Central Government may, if it deems necessary, by notification, relax the minimum qualifications required for appointment as a teacher, for such period, not exceeding five years, as may be specified in that notification.


Provided that a teacher who, at the commencement of this Act, does not possess minimum qualifications as laid down under sub- section (1), shall acquire such minimum qualifications within a period of five years. 11


(3) The salary and allowances payable to, and the terms and conditions of service of, teacher shall be such as may be prescribed."


Section 2(n) of the Act of 2009 which specifies schools for imparting elementary education is quoted below:-


"2(n) "School" means any recognized school imparting elementary education and includes- (i)a school established, owned or controlled by the appropriate Government or a local


authority;


(ii)an aided school receiving aid or grants to meet whole or part of its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority;


(iii)a school belonging to specified category; and


(iv)an unaided school not receiving any kind of aid or grants to meet its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local


authority;"

The notification dated 23rd August, 2010 is quoted below:-

"NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 23rd August, 2010

F.No.61-03/20/2010/NCTE/(N&S).- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (35 of 2009), and in pursuance of Notification No.S.O.750(E) dated 31st March, 2010 issued by the Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) hereby lays down the following minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in Class I to VIII in a school referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of 12

the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, with effect from the date of this Notification:-

1. Minimum Qualifications.-

(i) Classes I-V

(a) Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known) OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 45% marks and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2002.

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.)

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and 2- year Diploma in Education (Special Education)

AND
(b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.

(ii) Classes VI-VIII

(a) B.A./B.Sc. and 2- year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known)

OR

B.A./B.Sc. With atleast 50% marks and 1-year Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.)

OR

B.A./B.Sc. With atleast 45% marks and 1-year Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.) in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations issued from time to time in this regard

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year Bachelor in Elementary Education (B.El.Ed)

13

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4 year BA/B.Sc.Ed or B.A.Ed./BSc.Ed. OR

BA/B.Sc. With at least 50% marks and 1-year B.Ed. (Special Education).

AND
(b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.

2. Diploma/Degree Course in Teacher Education.- For the purposes of this Notification, a diploma/degree course in teacher education recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) only shall be considered. However, in case of Diploma in Education (Special Education) and B.Ed. (Special Education), a course recognized by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) only shall be considered.

3. Training to be undergone.-A person-

(a) with BA./B.Sc. With atleast 50% marks and B.Ed. qualification shall also be eligible for appointment for class I to V upto 1st January, 2012 provided he undergoes, after appointment, an NCTE recognized 6 month special programme in Elementary Education.

(b) with D.Ed (Special Education) or B.Ed. (Special Education) qualification shall undergo, after appointment, an NCTE recognized 6-month special programme in Elementary Education.

4. 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 14

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.

5. 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).

HASIB AHMAD, Member Secy."

It is stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NCTE that prior to 27.9.2007, NCTE has not prescribed qualifying marks in B.A., B.Com. B.Sc. or Senior Secondary etc. By way of the said Notification dated 27.9.2007, the eligibility criteria was prescribed to the effect that candidates with atleast 45% 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 of B.Ed. etc. The reservation for SC/ST/OBC and other categories were provided as per the Rules of the Central 15

Government/State Government, whichever was applicable. Relaxation of 5% marks was provided in favour of SC/ST/OBC and other categories of candidates. The eligibility criteria laid down in the Notification dated 27.9.2007 is quoted below:-

"3.2 Eligibility

3.2.1 Candidates with atleast 45% marks either in the Bachelor's Degree and/or in the Master's degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, are eligible for admission to the programme.

3.2.2 The reservation for SC/ST/OBC and other categories shall be as per the rules of the Central Government/State Government, whichever is applicable. There shall be relaxation of 5% marks in favour of SC/ST/OBC and other categories of candidates."

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. Para 3(2) prescribing eligibility is quoted below:-

"3(2) Eligibility

(a) Candidate with a tleast fifty percent marks either in the Bachelor's Degree and/or in the Master's degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, are eligible for admission to the programme.

(b) The reservation in seats and relaxation in the qualifying marks in favour of the reserved categories shall be as per the rules of the concerned Government."

It is apparent from the above that 50% marks were required either in Bachelor's Degree and/or Master
Degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto with effect from 31.8.2009. Earlier 45% marks were required in Bachelor's Degree or Master Degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto w.e.f. 27.9.2007. The said criteria as stated by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NCTE on being instructed by Regional Director, shall not be insisted in case admission has been taken by the incumbent in the requisite courses specified in para 1 of the notification dated 23.8.2010, prior to the aforesaid dates. It is apparent that incumbents 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 said criteria shall not be applicable to an incumbent who has obtained admission earlier in the requisite courses prior to aforesaid dates. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Notification dated 23.8.2010 is illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires being wholly unnecessary and repugnant to the Service Rules of the State. In our opinion, the said notification cannot be said to be illegal or ultra vires the Constitution. It has been issued as per mandate of Section 23(1) of the Act of 2009 which enables the NCTE being academic authority authorized by Central Government by notification to prescribe minimum qualifications. The Notification has been issued with the objective to provide efficient education at the primary and upper primary level. The Act of 2009 has been enacted to provide for free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years. Over the years there has been significant spatial and numerical expansion of elementary schools in the country, yet the goal of universal elementary education continues to elude us. The number of children, particularly children from disadvantaged groups and weaker sections, who drop out of school before completing elementary education, remains very large. Moreover, the quality of learning achievement is not always entirely satisfactory even in the case of children who complete elementary education. The Act of 2009 seeks to provide that every child has a right to be provided full time elementary education of satisfactory and equitable quality in a formal school which satisfies certain essential norms and standards. It provides compulsory education, free education, duties and responsibilities of the appropriate Government, local authorities, parents, schools and teachers in providing free and compulsory education and a system for protection of the right of children and decentralized grievance redressal mechanism. The legislation is anchored in the belief that the values of equality, social justice and democracy and the creation of a just and humane society can be achieved only through provision of inclusive elementary education to all. 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 and ability to meet the challenges of teaching at the primary and upper primary level. Considering the provisions of the Act of 2009, aims and objects of the Act of 2009 and the purpose for which minimum qualifications have been prescribed vide Notification dated 23rd August, 2010, we find that prescription of minimum qualifications is with the objective to ensure providing of quality education at primary and upper primary level. In the present scenario, there is high competition and deterioration in the standard of education, mashroom growth of institutions without requisite infrastructure and keeping this aspect in mind, 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 all, rather it would bring national standards and benchmark of teacher quality in the recruitment process, it would induce teacher education institutions and students from these institutions to further improve their performance standards and it would convey positive message to all stakeholders that the Government lays special emphasis on teacher quality and ultimately, by recruiting highly qualified teachers, children would be benefited. It is also permissible to lay down certain qualifications for appearing in the TET. However, as agreed by learned counsel for the NCTE, the NCTE is not going to wipe off the qualification obtained by taking admission prior to 27.9.2007 and 31.8.2009. As per the concession provided by the NCTE, it cannot be said that there is wiping out of the qualification with retrospective effect when such standards were not prescribed.

Submission was raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in Service Rules of the State such qualifications are not being provided. The State Government vide Notification dated 11.5.2011 amended the qualification criteria as laid down in the Rules 266, 273 and schedules appended to the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. Copy of the said 19

Notification has been placed on record, which shows that the State Government has framed the amended rules, namely, Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Second Amendment) Rules, 2011 by which Rules 266 and 273 and schedules attached thereto were amended and for recruitment to the post of Teacher, the qualifications as prescribed from time to time by NCTE as per provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Act of 2009 were laid down. Thus, submission raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Notification issued under section 23(1) of the Act of 2009 is repugnant to the said Service Rules does not survive. Apart from this, clearing TET does not ensure the employment, but ensures the quality whereas the Service Rules in the State of Rajasthan deal with employment. Thus, examination of TET was not necessary to be provided in the State Service Rules. However, in any view of the matter, as already stated above, it has now been provided by way of amendment in Service Rules.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, who have passed B.Ed. or its equivalent course from the Jammu and Kashmir that though they are resident of Rajasthan, but obtained admission in Jammu and Kashmir where prescription of minimum 45% marks in graduation or post graduation or equivalent qualification with effect from 27.9.2007 and 50% in graduation or post graduation or equivalent qualification with effect from 31.8.2009 etc. was not applicable and as such, even if they have obtained admission in requisite courses in Jammu and Kashmir after aforesaid prescription of minimum percentage by NCTE, they should be permitted to stake their claim in the TET examination ignoring the eligibility criteria prescribed by NCTE with effect from 27.9.2007 and 31.8.2009.

We cannot accept the aforesaid submission. In case they have passed the B.Ed. or any other requisite course, which is prescribed by NCTE in the Notification dated 23.8.2010, obviously, they can stake their claim subject to the condition that they fulfil the eligibility criteria as prescribed by NCTE applicable in Rajasthan vide notifications dated 23.9.2007 and 31.8.2009. In our opinion, it was 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, they cannot stake their claim in TET which is being conducted in State of Rajasthan. It is open to NCTE to lay down eligibility criteria which is equally applicable to all. There cannot be different criteria for Rajasthan incumbents and incumbents from 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 21

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. The petition was dismissed. The decision is of no help to the cause espoused by the petitioners.

Yet another decision of Allahabad High Court has been relied upon in Smt.Sadhana Singh V/s State of UP. & ors. (Special Appeal No.(1323) of 2009) in which petitioner has obtained degree of B.Ed. from the Jammu and Kashmir University and applied in the selections for Special BTC Training Course, 2007 designed specially for those, who have B.Ed. degrees for training to fill up vacancies of teachers with primary school teachers training, after seeking approval of the NCTE. The petitioner was excluded from the selection on the ground that she has obtained B.Ed. degree from Jammu and Kashmir University. In that, the decision of the Full Bench of Allahabad High Court dated 6.1.2009 in Special Appeal No.858 of 2008 Bhupendra Nath Tripathi & ors. V/s State of U.P.& ors. was referred to in which it has been laid down that exclusion of the candidates from the field of eligibility for Special Basic Training Course 2007, who had obtained B.Ed. degree prior to enforcement of National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 or after the enforcement of National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 during the period when the application of the Institution or the University was pending consideration was arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The decision does not assist the petitioners as it is the case where NCTE Act was not enforced or 22

where institutions have applied but the recognition was not given. In the instant case, NCTE Act was in force in the area in question in Rajasthan and NCTE has prescribed the eligibility criteria, which is equally applicable to all. Thus, the above decision is of no help to the petitioners.

In Hanuman Lal Harijan V/s State of Rajasthan (1997 (3) WLC (Raj.) 142), the Division Bench of this Court has laid down with respect to eligibility that once eligibility was recognized and subsequent de- recognition of any qualification will have prospective effect and qualification acquired before de- recognition would be treated as valid qualification. In State of Rajasthan & ors. V/s Shiv Karan & ors. (1994(3) WLC (Raj.) 594), it has been held that since the petitioner passed Prathma Examination prior to its de-recognition and said examination at the relevant time was recognized as equivalent to High School/Matriculation, he was entitled to be considered for promotion on the basis of Prathma qualification. To that extent, the NCTE has agreed to consider the candidature of the persons in case admission was obtained by them in the requisite course when the prescription of minimum percentage was not in force. The learned counsel for the petitioners pressed into service the decision in State of Rajasthan V/s Bhupendra Singh (RLR 2002(1) 198) in which it has been laid down that the State Government cannot provide two different standards for admission to LL.B. and providing of minimum 60% marks for graduates from University outside the State of Rajasthan and 45% marks for graduates from University within State of Rajasthan was held to be unfair, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The above decision is of no help to the petitioners, but rather defeats the cause espoused by them as students obtaining degrees from Jammu and Kashmir cannot claim differential treatment in the matter of prescription of qualifications from time to time by NCTE which are equally applicable to all in Rajasthan.

In Basic Education Board UP V/s Upendra Rai and ors. ((2008) 3 SCC 432), the Apex Court has considered the question of recruitment process and change in eligibility conditions with respect to educational qualifications, equivalent qualification, recognition/derecognition, granting/revocation of equivalent and held that Diploma in Education (DEd) is no longer regarded as equivalent to Basic Teacher's Certificate after the circular dated 11.8.1997 in UP. The Apex Court has also laid down that the court cannot interfere with policy decision of the Government unless it is in violation of some statutory or constitutional provision. The Apex Court has also laid down that grant of equivalence 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 the experts appointed by the Government, and the court does not have expertise in such matters and it should exercise judicial restraint and not interfere in it. The Apex Court has held thus:-

"14. 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 24

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."

The Apex Court in the above case has also discussed the scope of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. However, in the instant case, we are concerned with the Act of 2009 and the eligibility criteria prescribed in the Notification dated 23rd August, 2010 issued by NCTE under the authority of section 23(1) of the Act of 2009. In such matter, scope of interference is minimum and we cannot accept the submission raised by the petitioners that qualification of possessing minimum percentage 45% or 50% as the case may be in the requisite course after 27.9.2007 or 31.8.2009 as the case may be, should be given go-bye. They can stake their claim on the basis of requisite course of B.Ed. provided they fulfil the other requirement as per 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.

In Rajasthan Public Service Commission V/s Kaila Kumar Paliwal & anr. ((2007) 10 SCC 260), where for
promotion to the post of Headmaster, teaching experience of five years was essential as per the relevant Rules and feeder post for promotion to Headmaster was Teacher Grade II and for Grade II feeder post Grade III and it was held by the Apex Court that Public Service Commission rightly decided that teaching experience as Teacher Gr.III did not satisfy the conditions for appointment as Headmaster. A person in order to be considered for promotion to a higher post must possess the essential qualification. If he does not do so, he cannot be considered therefor. 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.

Consequently, the questions referred by the Single Bench for adjudication by the Division Bench are answered in seriatum thus:-

"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.

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. 

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.

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.

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.

(KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI), J. (ARUN MISHRA), C.J. Parmar


Source : http://indiankanoon.org/doc/390714/

Friday, June 1, 2012

www.ptet2012.net – PTET 2012 Results | PTET Result 2012 – www.ptetadmissions.nic.in


Sarkari Naukri Damad India. Latest Upadted Indian Govt Jobs - http://sarkari-damad.blogspot.com
www.ptet2012.net – PTET 2012 Results | PTET Result 2012 – www.ptetadmissions.nic.in


www.ptet2012.net – PTET 2012 Results | PTET Result 2012 – ptetadmissions.nic.in | Rajasthan Pre Teacher Education Test 2012 Result – ptet2012.net

Jai Narayan Vyas University Jodhpur was Conducted PTET 2012 Exam on 22-04-2012 for Admissions in B.Ed Degree Courses. Candidates are waiting for there exam results very desperately.

PTET Result 2012 has Published on this Url - http://www.ptet2012.net/getForRolL.php

This exam results has been declared on 22-5-2012 between 2.00pm to 5.00pm.

B. Ed Holders can not give exam of Primary Level - I ( Grade 3rd Teacher Recruitment in Rajasthan)


टैट के फस्र्ट लेवल पास बीएडधारियों को सुप्रीम कोर्ट से राहत नहीं
Supreme Court : B. Ed Holders can not give level - I teacher exam - Grade 3rd Teacher recruitment in Rajasthan
तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के लेवल वन में नहीं बैठ सकेंगे बीएड धारी

As per NCTE Guidelines, B.Ed holder are eligible upto 1st jan 2012 for Primary Teacher Job

जोधपुर। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने टेट के लेवल फस्र्ट पास बीएड धारकों को तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के लेवल वन के योग्य मानने बाबत राजस्थान हाईकोर्ट की खंडपीठ के आदेश को चुनौती देने वाली विशेष अनुमति याचिका की सुनवाई में संबंधित पक्षों को नोटिस जारी करते हुए भर्ती परीक्षा के प्रोसेस को याचिका के निस्तारण के अधीन कर दिया है। गौरतलब है कि तृतीय श्रेणी भर्ती परीक्षा शनिवार को जिला स्तर पर आयोजित की जा रही है, जिसमें अब लेवल वन पास बीएड धारी शिरकत नहीं कर सकेंगे।

आरटेट परीक्षा के लेवल फस्र्ट उत्तीर्ण बीएड धारकों के पक्ष में राजस्थान हाईकोर्ट की एकल पीठ ने 19 मई 2012 को आदेश पारित करते हुए 2 जून को आयोजित होने वाली तृतीय श्रेणी भर्ती परीक्षा के लेवल फस्र्ट के योग्य माना था। बाद में राज्य सरकार ने हाईकोर्ट की खंडपीठ में अपील दायर की। मुख्‍य न्यायाधीश अरुण मिश्रा व न्यायाधीश संगीत लोढ़ा की खंडपीठ ने 25 मई को एकलपीठ के आदेश पर रोक लगाते हुए भर्ती परीक्षा को अपील के निस्तारण के अधीन किया था। खंडपीठ के इस आदेश को चुनौती देने के लिए प्रार्थी वीराराम व अन्य ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट में विशेष अनुमति याचिका दायर की थी।


न्यूज़ साभार : Bhaskar.com (1.6.12)

राजस्थान शिक्षक पात्रता, तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा में नहीं बैठ पाएंगे बीएड धारी

राजस्थान शिक्षक पात्रता, तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा में नहीं बैठ पाएंगे बीएड धारी
Grade 3rd Teacher Recruitment Rajasthan 
Supreme Court : B. Ed Degree Holders are not allowed for Primary Teacher (Level-1) in Grade 3rd Teacher Recruitment Exam in Rajasthan
to be held on 2nd June 2012

नई दिल्ली। राजस्थान शिक्षक पात्रता परीक्षा के प्रथम स्तर में उत्तीर्ण 70 हजार बीएडधारी अभ्यर्थियों को तगड़ा झटका लगा है। ये बीएडधारी 2 जून को होने वाली तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के (प्रथम स्तर)में नहीं बैठ पाएंगे। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने इन अभ्यर्थियों को प्रथम स्तर एग्जाम में बैठने की अनुमति देने से इनकार कर दिया है। हालांकि कोर्ट ने परीक्षा परिणाम को अपने अधीन रखा है।

राजस्थान सरकार ने कोर्ट में दलील दी कि बीएडधारी अभ्यर्थियों की संख्या बहुत ज्यादा है इसलिए इनके लिए प्रवेश पत्र की व्यवस्था करना संभव नहीं हैं। इस पर कोर्ट ने कहा कि जब तक अंतिम आदेश नहीं आ जाता तब तक ये परीक्षा में नहीं बैठेंगे। हालांकि कोर्ट ने कहा कि अगल आदेश अगर बीएडधारियों के पक्ष में आता है तो उनके लिए विशेष परीक्षा की व्यवस्था कराई जाए।

गौरतलब है कि राजस्थान हाईकोर्ट ने बीएड धारियों के फर्स्ट लेवल एग्जाम में बैठने पर रोक लगा दी थी। कोर्ट ने कहा था कि अगर सुप्रीम कोर्ट का आदेश इनके पक्ष में आता है तो सरकार इन्हें एग्जाम में बिठा सकती है। हाईकोर्ट कोर्ट के आदेश के बाद उन्होंने प्रदेश कांग्रेस अध्यक्ष चंद्राभान के दफ्तर के बाहर प्रदर्शन किया था। मुख्यमंत्री अशोक गहलोत ने उनकी समस्या पर विचार करने का आश्वासन दिया था।

News Source : MeriKhabar.com (1.6.2012)
http://www.merikhabar.com/News/_N54413.html
******************************************************

70000 B.ed holders will not appear for Raj TET first level: SC


Jaipur: Supreme Court on Friday give a shock to around 70000 B.ed holders by saying that they will not be allowed to appear for first level of Rajasthan Teachers Eligibility Test to be held on Saturday. These candidates were appear in third grade teacher recruitment exam (first level) on June 2. For the time being, SC has refused to allow these candidates to appear for the first level.

Rajasthan government presented an argument that due to excess numbers of B.ed holders in state, it is not possible to arrange admission card. On this plea, court ordered that till the final decision, these candidates will seize to appear for the first level and in case if final decision come in favour of B.ed holders then a special exam will be conducted for them.

It is noted that Rajasthan High court had also seized B.ed holder candidates to appear in first level exam. After this ruling, B.ed holders protested outside the office of Congress State President Chandrabhan, however Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot assurance them to consider their problem.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

वेबसाइट पर शिक्षक भर्ती के प्रवेश पत्र जारी



वेबसाइट पर शिक्षक भर्ती के प्रवेश पत्र जारी

Rajasthan Third Grade Teachers Recruitment (Admit card uploaded on website and candidate can download their admit card)

Third Grade Teacher Admit Card 2012 Download | 3rd Grade Admit Card 2012 | Third Grade Teacher Exam Admit Card 2012

RTET / CTET : सी टेट बीएडधारी को अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा के योग्य माना



RTET / CTET : सी टेट बीएडधारी को अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा के योग्य माना

हाईकोर्ट ने दिए थर्ड ग्रेड परीक्षा में प्रवेश के अंतरिम आदेश

Rajasthan Third Grade Teachers Recruitment (CTET Holder can give exam for RTET Level - I as a intrim measure given by Jodhpur Highcourt )

जोधपुर। हाईकोर्ट ने सी टेट पास बीएड धारी अभ्यर्थी को थर्ड ग्रेड शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के द्वितीय लेवल में बैठने के योग्य मानते हुए प्रवेश के अंतरिम आदेश जारी किए हैं। यह आदेश न्यायाधीश गोविंद माथुर ने रातानाडा जोधपुर निवासी प्रार्थी प्रीतम शर्मा व अन्य की ओर से दायर याचिका की सुनवाई में दिए।
अदालत में याचिका कर्ताओं की ओर से अधिवक्ता हनुमानसिंह चौधरी व प्रेमेन्द्र बोहरा ने कहा कि राज्य सरकार ने तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के लिए जो विज्ञप्ति जारी की थी उसमें सी टेट पास बीएड धारकों की योग्यता का कहीं जिक्र नहीं किया गया था।
इसी से व्यथित होकर अदालत में याचिकाएं दायर की गई। उन्होंने कहा कि एनसीटीई की ओर से 17 फरवरी 2011 को जारी टैट कं डक्टिंग गाइडलाइन्स के क्लॉज 10 बी व सी में इस बात का स्पष्ट उल्लेख किया गया है कि यदि किसी वर्ष में राज्य सरकार टेट आयोजित नहीं करती है तो अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा में सी टेट पास अभ्यर्थी योग्य माने जाएंगे। उन्होंने कहा कि एनसीआरटी व राज्य शिक्षा बोर्ड का सिलेबस भी एक सा ही है। उन्होंने यह भी कहा कि पंचायती राज ग्रामीण विकास के सर्कुलर 11 मई 2011 के अनुसार अनुकंपा पर नियुक्ति में भी सी टेट धारी मान्य हैं


न्यूज़ साभार : Bhaskar.com  ( 30.05.12)

RTET : नष्ट नहीं करें आर-टेट की ओएमआर शीट


RTET : नष्ट नहीं करें आर-टेट की ओएमआर शीट

जोधपुर। राजस्थान उच्च न्यायालय ने आर-टेट 2011 की उत्तर-कुंजी (आंसर शीट) में गड़बड़ी सम्बन्धी विभिन्न याचिकाओं की सुनवाई के दौरान आर-टेट की ओएमआर शीट फिलहाल नष्ट नहीं करने और याचिकाकर्ताओं को तृतीय श्रेणी अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा में अंतरिम रूप से शामिल करने के आदेश दिए हैं। न्यायाधीश गोविन्द माथुर ने आंसर शीट की विसंगति को लेकर आर-टेट समन्वयक व पंचायती राज सचिव सहित अन्य अघिकारियों से जवाब भी मांगा है।

जोधपुर एवं श्रीगंगानगर सहित कुछ जिलों के अभ्यर्थियों की ओर से अघिवक्ता हनुमानसिंह चौधरी एवं कानसिंह ओड ने अदालत में याचिका दायर कर बताया कि बोर्ड की उत्तर-कुंजी में खामियां हैं। सही जवाब को भी बोर्ड ने गलत मान लिया। ऎसे में कई अभ्यर्थी अपात्र घोषित कर दिए गए। बोर्ड की इस गलती के कारण अभ्यर्थी तृतीय श्रेणी भर्ती परीक्षा से वंचित हो गए हैं। इसके अलावा 30 मई के बाद आर-टेट समन्वयक अभ्यर्थियों की ओएमआर शीट नष्ट करने जा रहे हैं।
समाचार पत्रों में इसकी सूचना प्रकाशित करवाई गई है। याचिका में इसे विभिन्न आधारों पर चुनौती दी गई। इस पर प्रारंभिक सुनवाई के बाद न्यायाधीश गोविन्द माथुर ने अग्रिम आदेश तक ओएमआर शीट नष्ट करने पर रोक लगा दी। साथ ही याचिकाकर्ताओं को अध्यापक भर्ती परीक्षा में अंतरिम रूप से शामिल करने के आदेश दिए

News : rajasthanpatrika.com (30.05.2012)
Source : http://www.rajasthanpatrika.com/news/jodhpur/5302012/city-news/328393

RTET : बीएड धारक-टेट उत्तीर्ण को लेवल वन भर्ती परीक्षा में प्रवेश देने के आदेश



RTET : बीएड धारक-टेट उत्तीर्ण को लेवल वन भर्ती परीक्षा में प्रवेश देने के आदेश

Rajasthan Third Grade Teachers Recruitment (B. Ed Holder can give exam for RTET Level - I as a intrim measure given by Jodhpur Highcourt )

जोधपुर. राजस्थान हाईकोर्ट ने विशेष बीएड धारक तथा आरटेट के लेवल प्रथम व द्वितीय में उत्तीर्ण अभ्यर्थियों को 2 जून को आयोजित होने वाली तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के लेवल वन में अंतरिम प्रवेश देने के आदेश दिए हैं।

यह आदेश न्यायाधीश गोविंद माथुर ने प्रार्थिया नीलम राजपुरोहित व 9 अन्य की ओर से दायर याचिका की सुनवाई के तहत दिए। याचिकाकर्ताओं की ओर से अधिवक्ता डॉ. पीएस भाटी व डॉ. नुपूर भाटी ने कहा कि याचिकाकर्ता विशेष बीएड के साथ ही आरटेट के दोनों लेवल उत्तीर्ण हैं।

जब कि उनको 2 जून को आयोजित होने वाली तृतीय श्रेणी लेवल प्रथम की भर्ती परीक्षा में प्रवेश नहीं दिया जा रहा है। उन्होंने कहा कि एनसीटीई की 23 अगस्त 2010 को जारी अधिसूचना के क्लॉज 3 बी में कहा गया है कि स्पेशल बीएड धारक भी प्रारंभिक शिक्षा के लिए योग्य हैं, लेकिन उनको इस लेवल में नियुक्ति दिए जाने के छह माह में प्रारंभिक शिक्षा का प्रशिक्षण दिया जाएगा।

उन्होंने कहा कि इस तरह का प्रावधान होने के बावजूद सरकार याचिकाकर्ताओं को कैसे मना कर सकती है। इस पर अदालत ने सीईओ जिला परिषद व परीक्षा समन्वयक के नाम अंतरिम आदेश जारी करते हुए याचिकाकर्ताओं को 2 जून को आयोजित परीक्षा में अंतरिम प्रवेश देने के आदेश दिए।


News : Bhaskar.com (30.5.12)
http://www.bhaskar.com/article/RAJ-JOD-bed-holder---tate-passed-the-recruitment-examination-at-one-level-in-order-to-3340539.html



बीएड डिग्रीधारियों ने सरकार के खिलाफ की नारेबाजी


बीएड डिग्रीधारियों ने सरकार के खिलाफ की नारेबाजी

Rajasthan Third Grade Teachers Recruitment -
बीएड डिग्रीधारियों ने बीजेपी कार्यालय पर किया प्रदर्शन, थर्ड ग्रेड शिक्षक भर्ती के फस्र्ट लेवल एग्जाम में बैठाने की मांग को लेकर बीजेपी नेताओं को दिया ज्ञापन
जयपुर। थर्ड ग्रेड भर्ती परीक्षा के पहले लेवल से वंचित हुए बीएड डिग्रीधारियों ने बुधवार को बीजेपी के प्रदेश कार्यालय पर प्रदर्शन किया। इस दौरान उन्होंने राज्य सरकार के खिलाफ जोरदार नारेबाजी की और थर्ड ग्रेड के फस्र्ट लेवल के एग्जाम में बैठाने की मांग की। उन्होंने भाजपा कार्यालय में मौजूद नेताओं को अपनी पीड़ा सुनाई और सहयोग की मांगा। अब शाम को वे भाजपा विधायक घनश्याम तिवाड़ी से मिलने जाएंगे।
सरकार की गलत नीतियों के कारण टेट के प्रथम लेवल की योग्यता रखने वाले इन बीएड डिग्रीधारियों को थर्ड ग्रेड के पहले लेवल के एग्जाम से वंचित कर दिया गया है। वे पिछले कई दिनों से थर्ड ग्रेड शिक्षक भर्ती के फस्र्ट लेवल में शामिल किए जाने की मांग कर रहे हैं। समिति के अध्यक्ष जयंतीलाल खंडेलवाल ने कहा कि हमारा भविष्य अंधकार मय हो गया है। हमने भाजपा के नेताओं से मिलकर सहयोग मांगा है। भाजपा के नेताओं ने उन्हें उचित सहयोग का आश्वासन दिया है। उनका आंदोलन तब तक जारी रहेगा, तब तक उनको थर्ड ग्रेड के पहले लेवल के एग्जाम में शामिल नहीं कर लिया जाता।


News : Bhaskar,com ( 30.5.12)

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

www.bstc2012.org – Rajasthan BSTC Results 2012 | Pre BSTC 2012 Results General / Sanskrit

www.bstc2012.org – Rajasthan BSTC Results 2012 | Pre BSTC 2012 Results General / Sanskrit



Rajasthan BSTC 2012 Results | bstc2012.org- Rajasthan BSTC Results 2012 | Pre BSTC Results General/Sanskrit 2012

Rajasthan has declared its PRE BSTC (GENERAL/SANSKRIT)- 2012 Results at its official site bstc2012.org. This results is available now students can check there results by entering there roll no.
Follow this Url for Results- bstc2012.org



If Any one is having problem than he.she can contact to below address and telephone numbers-

Office Coordinator, BSTC(General)/BSTC(Sanskrit) Pre Exam – 2012
Mohan Lal Sukhadia University (MLSU), Udaipur – 313 039(Raj.)

Helpline Number- 02945150701,5150702,5150703,5150704,8104781950,8104781951,8104781952,8104781953

Email Id- bstc2012@gmail.com

RTE / TET : आने वाले दो दिन टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों के लिए ऐतिहासिक


RTE / TET : आने वाले दो दिन टीईटी अभ्यर्थियों के लिए ऐतिहासिक
कल  सुप्रीम कोर्ट में सुनवाई है कि क्या बी. एड धारी  अभ्यर्थी  , 1 जनवरी 2012  के  बाद भी प्राइमरी शिक्षक की भर्ती के पात्र हैं |
यह फैसला देश के लाखों  बी. एड धारी अभ्यर्थीयों के लिए महत्वपूर्ण है कारण आर टी ई के जरिए सर्वाधिक भर्ती प्राइमरी शिक्षकों की होनी है और योग्य शिक्षकों की कमी को देखते हुए , बी एड धारी अभ्यर्थीयों को नजरंदाज करना बेहद मुश्किल है |
अभी अधिकांश राज्यों में भर्ती शुरू नहीं हुई है जैसे कि - बिहार , उत्तरांचल  , हरयाणा , दिल्ली , राजस्थान , गुजरात , पंजाब , उत्तर प्रदेश (उत्तर प्रदेश में भर्ती तो समय सीमा से प्रारंभ हुई पर कोर्ट के आदेश से स्टे लग गया , और  इसको देखते हुए एन सी टी ई द्वारा छूट इतना गंभीर मुद्दा  नहीं है , पर आगामी भर्ती प्रक्रियाओं के लीए  एक गंभीर मुद्दा  है ) आदि 
इसको देखते हुए लगता है कि - सुप्रीम कोर्ट के निर्णय बी एड धारी टी ई टी अभ्यर्थीयों के लीए राहत दे सकता  है |


दूसरी तरफ उत्तर प्रदेश के हजारों अभ्यर्थी लखनऊ में धरने पर बेठे हुए हैं जो कि सरकार का  रूख जानने के  लिए  परेशान हैं | शायद इसका भी  फैसला  जल्द ही आ जाये |
३१ मई को हाई कोर्ट में  टी ई टी मामले पर विज्ञापन को लेकर सुनवाई होनी है | और यह दिन उत्तर प्रदेश के टी ई टी  अभ्यर्थियों  के  लिए  बेहद महवपूर्ण हैं क्योंकि इसके बाद इलाहबाद हाई कोर्ट की समर वेकेशन
शुरू होनी हैं और फिर हाई कोर्ट १ जुलाई को खुलेगी 


आज मीडिया जिस तरह से टीईटी मामले को दिखा रहा है, उससे लगता है कि वह वास्तविक स्थिति  से भटका रहा है |
उत्तर प्रदेश में जिस तरह से टीईटी  परीक्षा हुई और ओ . एम् . आर की तीन कापी बनाई गयी परिणाम , Answer Key ऑनलाइन जारी की  गयी , 
और धांधली हुई है तो कितने अभ्यर्थी धांधली में लिप्त पाए गए ऐसा कोई प्रमाण अभी तक सामने नहीं आया है 


उत्तर प्रदेश में टीईटी   अभ्यर्थियों    की भर्ती का मामला एक विज्ञापन को लेकर अदालत में चल रहा है , जिसका  फैसला  जानने के लीए अभ्यर्थी काफी समय से बैचेन हैं 
ऐसे पूरे मामले पर चर्चा कराई जाये , तब पता पड़ेगा की अभ्यर्थियों   की पीड़ा क्या है - कैसे उन्होंने रात रात जागकर पढाई की , कितने रूपए की फीस ड्राफ्ट के माध्यम से दी , कितने फार्म भरे ,
कितनी बार लाइन में लगे, बहुत सारे  अभ्यर्थी दूसरे राज्यों से आवेदन करने तथा परीक्षा देने भी आये


इन मीडिया वालों से पूछना चाहिए कि किसी और परीक्षार्थी के नक़ल करने के कारण  क्या इनको भी हाई स्कूल या १२ वी की परीक्षा में फेल कर दिया जाये, और तब तक परीक्षा कराई जाये , जब तक परीक्षा शत प्रतिशत शुद्धता से पूर्ण न हो जाये | तो उनको कैसा लगेगा


कई बार मीडिया ने  भ्रामक ख़बरें दी - जैसे टीईटी सिर्फ पात्रता परीक्षा है, माया सरकार ने चयन का आधार बदल कर गलत किया
 जिसका खंडन हाई कोर्ट के आदेश व एन सी टी ई गाइड लाइन स्वत करती है

Monday, May 28, 2012

RTET :बीएड धारकों को प्रथम लेवल के प्रवेश पत्र नहीं


 RTET :बीएड धारकों को प्रथम लेवल के प्रवेश पत्र नहीं
B.Ed HOLDERS are NOT eligible to appear in Exam / Admit Card
Rajasthan Teacher Eligibility Test / Third Grade Teacher Recruiment NEWS :

तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के प्रथम लेवल के लिए सोमवार दोपहर बाद प्रवेश-पत्र डाउन लोड किए जा सकेंगे, लेकिन बीएड डिग्रीधारकों को प्रवेश-पत्र जारी नहीं होंगे। हाईकोर्ट की बैंच ने हाल ही टेट के फस्र्ट लेवल में पास बीएडधारियों को इस परीक्षा में प्रवेश नहीं देने के निर्देश दिए थे।


परीक्षा दो जून को है। बीएड डिग्रीधारियों के प्रवेश पत्र जारी नहीं होने से इस परीक्षा में शामिल होने वाले अभ्यर्थियों की संख्या आधी रह जाने की संभावना है। पंचायती राज विभाग की आयुक्त अपर्णा अरोड़ा ने बताया कि एनसीटीई के प्रावधानों के अनुसार प्रथम लेवल में सिर्फ बीएसटीसी धारकों के लिए ही प्रवेश-पत्र जारी किए जाएंगे।


बीएसटीसी की डिग्री के साथ जिन अभ्यर्थियों के पास बीएड डिग्री या कोई समकक्ष डिग्री है, उनके प्रवेश पत्र भी जारी होंगे। सिर्फ बीएड और टेट का फस्र्ट लेवल पास अभ्यर्थी फिलहाल इस परीक्षा में शामिल नहीं हो सकेंगे। हालांकि, अभी इनके बारे में कोर्ट में फैसला होना बाकी है। कोर्ट जो तय करेगा, वैसा ही किया जाएगा। उधर, इस भर्ती परीक्षा में 6 दिन शेष रह जाने के बावजूद प्रवेश-पत्र जारी नहीं होने से अभ्यर्थियों में असमंजस की स्थिति थी।
अभ्यर्थियों ने जिला परिषदों तथा जयपुर स्थित पंचायती राज विभाग के कार्यालय में भी चक्कर लगाने शुरू कर दिए थे। तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षकों की भर्ती में प्रथम लेवल में सामान्य शिक्षकों के 10,553 और विशेष शिक्षकों के 447 पद रिक्त हैं। इन पदों के लिए 6,02,019 अभ्यर्थियों ने आवेदन किया था, जिनमें बीएसटीसी के अलावा बीएड डिग्रीधारी भी थे। बीएड डिग्रीधारियों को प्रवेश-पत्र जारी नहीं किए जाने के बाद अब आधे अभ्यर्थी ही परीक्षा दे पाएंगे।

News : Bhaskar,com (28.5.12)

RPSC Blog  1- CURRENT NEWS  3rd grade date, 3rd grade exam, 3rd grade exam information.filling form information for 3rd grade, 3rd grade seats, date of exam 3rd grade, first level news for 3rd grade, high court order for 3rd grade, http://rpsc.rajasthan.gov.in  Leave a comment

RTET / RTE : शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा: सरकार की गलती, बीएडधारी खामियाजा क्यों भुगतें



RTET / RTE : शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा: सरकार की गलती, बीएडधारी खामियाजा क्यों भुगतें

Rajasthan Teacher Eligibility Test / Third Grade Teacher Recruiment NEWS :
एक बार फिर कांग्रेस कार्यालय पहुंचे बीएडधारी, प्रदेशाध्यक्ष को मांगों को लेकर सौंपा ज्ञापन, थर्ड ग्रेड के प्रथम लेवल के एग्जाम में बैठाने की मांग

जयपुर। थर्ड ग्रेड भर्ती परीक्षा के पहले लेवल से वंचित हुए बीएड डिग्रीधारी सोमवार को एक बार फिर पीसीसी कार्यालय पहुंच गए। यहां वे कार्यालय परिसर में धरने पर बैठ गए। इससे पहले उन्होंने नेहरू बालोद्यान में बैठक की और कांग्रेस के प्रदेशाध्यक्ष डॉ. चंद्रभान से मिलने का निर्णय लिया। इसके बाद वे पीसीसी कार्यालय के लिए निकल गए। वे पीसीसी कार्यालय में कांग्रेस के प्रदेशाध्यक्ष डॉ. चंद्रभान से मिले और मांगों का ज्ञापन सौंपा।
टेट के प्रथम लेवल की योग्यता रखने वाले यह बीएड डिग्रीधारी थर्ड ग्रेड शिक्षक भर्ती के फस्र्ट लेवल में शामिल किए जाने की मांग कर रहे थे। समिति के अध्यक्ष जयंतीलाल खंडेलवाल और शक्तिसिंह ने कहा कि जब तक उनको थर्ड ग्रेड शिक्षक के पहले लेवल में शामिल नहीं किया जाता, उनका आंदोलन जारी रहेगा। सरकार ने टेट की परीक्षा से पहले उन्होंने यह नहीं बताया था कि वे पहले लेवल की शिक्षक भर्ती में नहीं बैठ सकेंगे। सरकार की इस गलती का खामियाजा वे क्यों भुगतें


News : Bhaskar.com ( 28.5.12)

RTET : टेट फस्र्ट लेवल बीएड धारी सुप्रीम कोर्ट पहुंचे

RTET : टेट फस्र्ट लेवल बीएड धारी सुप्रीम कोर्ट पहुंचे

Rajasthan Teacher Eligibility Test / Third Grade Teacher Recruiment NEWS :
हाईकोर्ट की खंडपीठ के आदेश के खिलाफ लगाई विशेष अनुमति याचिका, अति आवश्यक मामला होने की वजह से 30 मई को होगी सुनवाई


जोधपुर। तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा के प्राइमरी स्तर में टेट फस्र्ट लेवल पास करने वाले बीएड धारकों ने हाईकोर्ट से नकारात्मक उत्तर मिलने के बाद सोमवार को सर्वोच्च न्यायालय में गुहार लगाई है

अतिआवश्यक श्रेणी में शामिल करते हुए सर्वोच्च न्यायालय में मामले की सुनवाई 30 मई को रखी गई है। प्रार्थीगण वीराराम व अन्य की ओर से अधिवक्ता केएस भाटी व ऐश्वर्य भाटी ने सोमवार को सर्वोच्च न्यायालय में न्यायाधिपति बीएस चौहान व न्यायाधीश दीपक मिश्रा की पीठ में अर्जेंट में शनिंग में रखते हुए विशेष अनुमति याचिका दायर की जिसकी संख्या 18478/2012 है। जहां अधिवक्ताओं ने कहा कि खंडपीठ ने टेट के प्रथम लेवल उत्तीर्ण बीएड धारकों को तृतीय श्रेणी भर्ती परीक्षा के प्रथम स्तर की परीक्षा में प्रवेश देने से संबंधित एकल पीठ के निर्णय पर रोक लगा दी है। जिससे उनके विधिसम्मत अधिकारों का हनन हुआ है। 
कृपया हमारी गुहार सुनकर हमें परीक्षा में शामिल होने का अवसर दिलावे। 

शीर्ष अदालत ने मामले को अतिआवश्यक श्रेणी में लेते हुए बुधवार को ही मामले की सुनवाई करने की इजाजत दे दी है। सुनवाई न्यायाधीश केएस राधाकृष्ण व न्यायाधीश जगदीश सिंह खेहर की पीठ में होगी। गौरतलब है कि 25 मई को हाईकोर्ट के मुख्य न्यायाधीश अरुण मिश्रा व न्यायाधीश संगीत लोढ़ा की खंडपीठ ने टेट फस्र्ट लेवल पास बीएड धारकों को तृतीय श्रेणी शिक्षक भर्ती के प्राथमिक स्तर की परीक्षा में प्रवेश दिए जाने बाबत एकल पीठ के फैसले पर रोक लगा दी थी। साथ ही सरकार को परीक्षा कराए जाने की अनुमति देते हुए मामले की अगली सुनवाई ग्रीष्मकालीन अवकाश के बाद करने व पूरे मामले को याचिकाओं के निस्तारण के अधीन करने के आदेश पारित किए थे

News : Bhaskar.com ( 28.5.12)

RTET : विशेष शिक्षकों को भी पास करना होगा टेट


RTET : विशेष शिक्षकों को भी पास करना होगा टेट

Rajasthan Highcourt : Teacher Eligibility Test is Compulsory for Special Teachers
जयपुर। राजस्थान हाईकोर्ट ने एक अहम आदेश में कहा है कि विशेष शिक्षकों को भी शिक्षक पात्रता परीक्षा पास करनी होगी। मुख्य न्यायाधीश अरूण मिश्रा और न्यायाधीश एनके जैन ने जतिन पारीख और अन्य की याचिकाएं खारिज करते हुए यह आदेश दिया। याचिकाकर्ताओं ने आरसीआई के नियमों का हवाला देते हुए विशेष रिरायत की मांग की थी। इन्होंने खुद को शिक्षक पात्रता परीक्षा पास किए बगैर शिक्षक भर्ती परीक्षा में शामिल करने की मांग की थी। विशेष शिक्षक मूक-बधिर बच्चों को पढ़ाते हैं, इसलिए उन्होंने विशेष रिरायत मांगी थी।

News : rajasthanpatrika.com (28.5.12)