- (1.) HEARD Sri Shailendra, Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Abhishek Srivastava for the appellants and Sri D. K. Arora learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri K. S. Kushwaha for the State.
(2.) ALI these appeals have been filed against a common judgment dated 01 st July, 2008 passed in three writ petitions No. 27578 of 2008 (Manjusha Arora v. State of U. P. and others), Writ Petition No. 27579 of 2008 (Bhupendra Nath Tripathi and others v. State of U. P. and others) and-Writ Petitipn No. 27577 of 2008 (Anjana Sirjgh v. State of U. P. and others ). For considering the issues raised in the"appeal it is sufficient to refer to the facts and pleadings of Writ Petition No. 27579 of 2008 (Bhupendra Nath Tripathi and others v. State of U. P. and others ). The writ petition was filed praying for writ of certiorari guashing the advertisement dated 18th July, 2007 and quashing the order dated 25th March, 2008 passed by Director, State Council for Education Research and Training, Nishatganj, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'scert') and further guashing the conseguential or-ders issued by Principals of various DIETs in conseguence to the letter of the Director, SCERT. Brief facts necessary for considering the issues are, the writ petitionersr appellants claimed to have obtained B. Ed. degree from institutions affiliated to Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidhyalaya, Varanasi and Purvanchal University, Jaunpur for different years i. e. from 1993 to 1998. The State of Uttar Pradesh for filling mor? than 60000 posts of Assistant Teacher in Primary Schools applied to the National Council of Teachers' Education (hereinafter referred to as 'ncte') constituted under National Council of Teachers' Education Act, 1993 for giving permission to impart Special B. T. C. Course, 2007 to the candidates who have B. Ed. degrees to m?k? them eligible for appointment as Assistant Teacher in the Primary Institution. NCTE granted permission to the State of Uttar Pradesh to run the Special B. T. C. Course, 2007 by its order dated 27th June, 2007. A Govern-ment Order dated 10th July, 2007 was issued thereafter laying down the eligibili-ties for imparting Special B. TG. Course, 2007. In pursuance of the Government order dajed 10th July, 2007 advertisement dated 18th July, 2007 was published. The relevant clause of advertisement, which is in issue in the present case, is as follows and has been guoted in the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge: "3 (2) Forselection in Special B. T. C. 2007, the minimum educational guali-fication shall be graduation and only those candidates who have passed B. Ed. examination as regular candidates from a recognized college/degree Col lege run by State/central Government/training College approved by NCTE and fulfill all other eligibilities, will be eligible. " All the petitioners-appellants submitted their application in response to the advertisement dated 18th July, 2007, thereafter, applications were processed by the State authorities and tney were called for by letter dated 19th April, 2008 for joining Special B. T. C. Course-2007. The letter further communicated that their names have been included in the tentative list of the candidates selected for imparting Special B. T. C. Course, 2007. Similar letters were also sent to other candidates calling them to join the training. In the meantime, relying on the Divi-sion Bench judgmentin Special Appeal No. 391 of 2008, Smt. Sunita Upadhyay v. State of U. P. and others, decided, on 13th March, 2008, Reported in 2008 (4) ADJ 672 (DB) the Director, SCERT issued a letter to all the Principals to act in accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench. After issuance of the said letter of the Director SCERT, the Principals issued consequential letters to the candidates informing that in view of the Division Bench judgment in Sunita Upadhyay's case (supra) they are not eligible for Special B. T. C. Course, 2007.
(3.) AGGRIEVED by the aforesaid actrons, the writ petitions were filed by the appellants. In the writ petition two principal submissions were pressed, firstly that the appellants-writ petitioners are fully eligible for imparting Special B. T. C. Course in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Ekta Shukla and others v. State of U. P and others, 2006 (1) ESC 531 and secondly, the advertisement dated 18th July, 2008 if read to mean that all the degrees of B. Ed. which were obtained prior to grant of recognition by NCTE under NCTE Act 1993 to the institution are not valid for Special B. T. C. Course-2007, such clause in the advertisement as well as the Government Order. dated 10th July, 2007 is arbitrary si?ce there is no rational basis for excluding those candidates who have obtained degree prior to grant of recognition under the NCTE Act, 1993. Learned Single Judge considered both the submissions and took the view that the State was fully competent to prescribe higher or stricter qualification for admission to the course. Judgments of the Apex Court in Dr. Preeti Srivastava and another v. Sfafe of U. P. and others, (1999) 7 SCC 120 and the judgment of Sfafe of Tamilnadu and another v. S. V. Bratheep (Minor) and others, (2004) 4 SCC 513 was relied upon by the learned Single Judge.;