- (1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. The contention of Sri K. C. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Government Order nowhere requires that the eligibility qualification for admission in Special ETC course must be obtained from an institute situated within the State of U. P. , and on the contrary, the advertisement makes all the candidates who have obtained the aforesaid degree from any University or Institution validly established in the Country to be eligible and the respondents are proceeding illegally by confining eligibility to only such candidates, who have obtained the said degree from an institution situated in the State of UP.
(2.) LEARNED Standing Counsel could not dispute that in the Government Order, there is no such restriction but he submits that as per the advertisement, all the candidates must belong to State of U. P. who possess the requisite qualification of B. Ed. , D. P. Ed. , B. P. Ed. , C. P. Ed, L. T. and may apply for admission in Special BTC Course 2007. He, therefore, submitted that the said advertisement shows that the degree must have been obtained from an Institution situated within the State of U. P. In my view, the petitioner's submission deserved to be sustained and I do not find any force in the submission of learned Standing Counsel for more than one reasons. Firstly, the admission in Special BTC Course-2007 is being done by State Council of Education Research & Training, U. P. , Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'scert'), in accordance with the Government Order dated 10. 7. 2007. As per the instructions obtained from it, the various Principals, District Institute of Education & Training (hereinafter referred to as 'diet') shall make selection in accordance with the aforesaid Government Order. The Government Order dated 1 0. 7. 2007 reads as under : "3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . @hindi The. subsequent order dated 6. 8. 2007 has only extended eligibility qualification to D. P. Ed. , B. P. Ed, C. P. Ed, and L. T. Degrees, but rest of all the conditions mentioned in the Government Order dated 1 0. 7. 2007 remained intact. A perusal of the aforesaid conditions nowhere shows that the eligibility qualification has been confined only to those, who have obtained the same within the State of U. P. only. In the past, the Government Orders specifically provided that the B. Ed. Degree must have been obtained from any University within the State of U. P. and a candidate who has obtained his degree outside the State would not be treated to be eligible. It is true that the validity of such condition came to be considered before this Court in the case of Upendra Rai v. State of U. P. and others, 2000 (1) ESC 543 (All), wherein a Division Bench of this Court struck down the same but the Apex Court reversed the said decision upholding that such conditions could have been prescribed by the State Government. That is not the position in the present case. In the Government Order dated 1 0-7. 2007, for admission in Special BTC Course 2007, there is no such restriction that the eligibility qualification ought to have been obtained from an institution situated only within the State of U. P. An advertisement which is consequential to the Government Order, is to be read consistent to the conditions contained in the Government Order since the selection to the aforesaid post is in pursuance to the Government Order and if there is any inconsistency between the Government Order and the advertisement, it is the Government Order which will prevail, though, even otherwise I do not find any such inconsistency therein.
(3.) IN the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent are directed not to reject the candidature of the petitioner only on the ground that he has obtained eligibility qualification from an institute outside the State of U. P. provided it is recognized by NCTE and the petitioner fulfils all other conditions prescribed in the aforesaid Government Orders dated 10. 7. 2007 and 6. 8. 2007. No costs. .;