Suneet Kumar, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Shailendra, Sri Alok Mishra, Sri Avanish Ranjan Srivastava, Sri H.M.B. Sinha and Sri P.S. Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Sudhanshu Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Prakash Paul, and Sri Prateek Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondent, as well as, Sri Ravi Agrawal and Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the N.C.T.E. and Sri Arun Kumar for the Board.
(2.) The batch of the writ petitions involve challenge based on similar questions of facts and law, on consent, are being heard and decided together.
(3.) The writ petitions are primarily directed against the order dated 23 June 2015 passed by the Director of Basic Education, Lucknow, whereby, the claim of the petitioners for appointment pursuant to Government Order dated 14 January 2004 has been rejected for the reason that petitioners do not fulfill the qualifications prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). It has been pointed that in some of the writ petitions the reasons assigned for rejecting the claim of the petitioners are different, but it is not being disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that primarily the case of the respondent-State is that the petitioners do not fulfill the requisite qualification for appointment as primary teacher.;