Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) ALL these writ petitions raising common questions of facts and law, have been heard together. The writ petition No. 58 of 2003 is being treated as leading case and reference to pleading in the said writ petition is sufficient for deciding the controversy raised in all these writ petitions.
(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to writ petition No. 58 of 2003 are; the petitioner passed High School examination and Higher Secondary School examination from Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal. The petitioner also obtained Buniyadi Prashikshan Praman Patra (two years course) from Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Madhya Pradesh Bhopal. District Basic Education Officer, Jaunpur issued an advertisement inviting applications for appointment on the post of Assistant Teachers in the primary schools run by Basic Shiksha Parishad in the rural area of Jaunpur. The advertisement provided that the candidates who have obtained B.T.C. Training certificate from District Institute and Training, Jaunpur may apply. The petitioner submitted an application for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher on the basis of the Buniyadi Prashikshan Praman Patra, 1993 granted by Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal. The petitioner filed the present writ petition alleging that in view of the advertisement dated 18.10.2002, the application of the petitioner is not being considered and the process of selection is going to start on 6.1.2003. The petitioner prayed for the following reliefs in the writ petition: "(i). Issue wit in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1 to consider the application/candidature of the petitioner on merit for selection on the post of Asstt. Teacher of Basic School in pursuance of the advertisement dated. 18.10.2002, Annexure 6 to the writ petition." Hon'ble Single Judge heard the writ petition on 10.1.2003 but rejected the application for interim relief filed by the petitioner. The writ petition was subsequently heard by Hon'ble Single Judge on 27.1.2004. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying on judgments of this Court in Smt. Asha Devi Pal v. State of U.P. and others, 2003(3) ESC 1140 (All) and Neeraj Trivedi v. State of U.P. and others, 2002(1) ESC 162 (All) and the judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Sandhya Srivastava and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2002(4) ESC 136 (All), contended that the petitioner's candidature cannot be rejected on the ground that he had obtained training certificate from the institution outside the State of U.P. On the other hand learned counsel appearing for the respondents relying on judgment of Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court dated 27.11.2003 in writ petition No. 8994 of 1998, Mahendra Pratap Singh and others v. State of U. P. and others, contended that Buniyadi Prashikshan Praman Patra, issued by Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal does not entitle a candidate to apply for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher in a primary school run by the Basic Shiksha Parishad. Hon'ble Single Judge opined that since there is a conflict of opinion in two Hon'ble Single Judges, the matter be referred to a Division Bench. In pursuance of the order of Hon'ble Single Judge dated 27.1.2004, Hon'ble the Chief Justice directed the matter to be placed before the Division Bench hence, the writ petition has been placed for hearing before the Division Bench. The Division Bench hearing the writ petition noticed that the questions involved in the writ petition have been referred to a Full Bench in writ petition No. 2856 (M/s) of 2004 Rajeshwar Singh v. State of U.P, the Division Bench took the view that case be listed after decision of the Full Bench. The aforesaid Full Bench decision has been delivered on 14.7.2010. Thereafter the writ petition has again been listed for hearing before this Bench. In writ petition No. 3929 of 2003, Smt. Hemesh Kumari, the petitioner had obtained Shikshak Prashikshan Pariksha from the State of Rajasthan, which was granted in the year 1998 by Shiksha Vibhageey Parikshayen Rajasthan Bikaner. An advertisement dated 6.9.2002 was issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Mathura inviting applications for appointment of Assistant Teachers from the candidates having B.T.C. Of 2002 from District Institute of Education and Training, Mathura. The petitioner made an application in response to the said advertisement The candidature of the petitioner was rejected by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Mathura vide order dated 13.12.2002 which was challenged by means of writ petition No. 42368 of 2002 and vide order of this Court dated 10.10.2002, the matter was referred to the District Basic Education Officer to consider the claim of the petitioner.
(3.) IN writ petition No. 46471 of 2002, Smt. Shakuntala Devi, the petitioner claims to have obtained Diploma in Education certificate in the year 1998 from Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal. IN response to the advertisement dated 11.9.2002, issued by District Basic Education Officer, Pratapgarh, inviting applications for Assistant Teachers, the petitioner made an application. The petitioner prayed for a mandamus, commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Teacher. We have heard Sri Aditya Narayan, Sri V.B. Srivastava and Sri R.K. Ojha, learned counsel appearing of the petitioners in the above writ petitions and Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad as well as learned Standing Counsel.;