GOVIND KUMAR DIXIT Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2011-12-151
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on December 14,2011

GOVINDKUMARDIXIT Appellant
VERSUS
STATEOF U.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioners at length, learned Standing Counsel, Sri S.K. Verma and Sri R.A. Akhtar, Advocates for respondents.
(2.) Petitioners have assailed the validity of Rule 14 of U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the "1981 Rules") as inserted by notification dated 09.11.2011 and further request to treat it inoperative in case this Court finds that conditions in advertisement dated 29/30.11.2011 is based upon the said Rules. They have also assailed the validity of advertisement dated 29/30.11.2011 issued by the Board of Basic Education in U.P. (hereinafter referred to as the "Board")
(3.) It would be appropriate first to notice the very Rule which has been assailed in this writ petition. It reads as under: "14. Determination of vacancies and preparation of list (1) In respect of appointment, by direct recruitment to the post of Mistress of Nursery Schools and Assistant Master or Assistant Mistress of Junior Basic Schools under clause (a) of rule 5, the appointing authority shall determine the number of vacancies as also the number of vacancies to be reserved for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and other categories under rule 9 and notify the vacancies in at least two leading news papers having adequate circulation in the State as well as in concerned district inviting applications from candidates possessing prescribed training qualification from the district concerned and who have passed teacher eligibility test conducted by Government of Uttar Pradesh. (2) The appointing authority shall scrutinize the applications received in pursuance of the advertisement and prepare a list of such persons as appear to possess the prescribed academic qualifications and be eligible for appointment. (3) The names of candidates in the list prepard under sub-rule (2) shall then be arranged in such manner that their names shall be placed in descending order on the basis of the marks obtained in Teacher Eligibility Test conducted by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. Provided that if two or more candidates obtain equal marks, the candidiate senior in age shall be placed higher. (4) No person shall be eligible for appointment unless his or her name is included in the list prepared under sub-rule (2). (5) the list prepared under sub-rule (2) and arranged in accordance with sub-rule (3) shall be forwarded by the appointing authority to the selection committee.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.