- (1.) The petitioners are candidates for appointment to the post of teachers in primary schools situated in rural areas working under Zila Parishads. They have approached this Court with a prayer for quashing clarification dated 28.6.2007 (P-3) further restricting the eligibility criteria which has violated Rule 10(1) (b) of Punjab Panchayati Raj Primary Teachers (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006 (for brevity 'the Rules') (P-1).
(2.) Brief facts may first be noticed. For filling up 1569 posts of teachers in primary schools in rural areas which have been transferred to Zila Parishads, an advertisement was issued by respondent No. 2 inviting applications from eligible candidates. For receipt of applications last date fixed was 20.7.2007. The petitioners who are domicile of U.T. Chandigarh and have passed out Elementary Teachers Training course from State Institute of Education, Sector 32, Chandigarh being fully eligible have applied for the post in Mohali District. According to the eligibility criteria published by respondent No. 2 the recruitment was to be made district wise and from amongst those who are domicile of the district. The candidates who were domicile in U.T. Chandigarh could have applied for Mohali district only. The qualifications for the post were : "(i) 10+2 Pass and Diploma in Elementary Teacher Training course recognized by School Education Board of any State Government or the Central Government or a certificate of an equivalent course from the Defence Services of the Union of India. (ii) Candidate must have passed Punjabi in Matriculation examination equivalent or higher. Applications without proof having passed Punjabi as above will not be received. (iii) Candidates submitting their application with grades in place of marks will not be considered."
(3.) It was further provided that in case candidates with qualifications of Elementary Teachers Training were not available then candidates with B.A./B.Sc./B.Com. plus B.Ed. were to be considered. The petitioners being fully eligible applied for the post in Mohali District. However, their candidature became doubtful when respondent No. 2 issued a clarification dated 28.6.2007 (P-3) which imposed further condition to adjudge their 'domicile' which led to the filing of the instant petition. When the matter came up for consideration on 13.7.2007 a Division Bench of this Court had directed the respondents to accept the applications of the petitioners provisionally and consider their claim in the process of selection. The result of the petitioners was required to be retained in a sealed cover, which could be opened only on the passing of express order by this Court.;