SATYAM MAJHI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the constitutional validity of Schedule-III enacted under Rule 8 of the Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019 (for short, 'the Rules of 2019'), whereby qualification for the post of Assistant Teacher (Science/Laboratory) has been prescribed as Higher Secondary with Biology/Mathematics Subject, however, Diploma Holders have been left out to be qualified for the post of Assistant Teacher (Science/Laboratory).

(2.) It is the case of the writ petitioner that earlier, as per the Chhattisgarh Teacher (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 (for short, 'the Rules of 2012') (Annexure P-3), the candidates having equivalent qualification of diploma are entitled for the post of Assistant Teacher (Science/ Laboratory) and while enacting the Rules of 2019, in place of the Rules of 2012, which came into force with effect from 5/3/2019, such qualification has been omitted which violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and therefore the petitioner is deprived of opportunity to appear in the examination of Assistant Teacher (Science/Laboratory), as such, it is unconstitutional and invalid and it be declared ultra vires to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

(3.) Return has been filed on behalf of the State stating inter alia that fixing or determining the eligibility criteria for selection like subject, minimum qualification and percentage of marks and omission of post are always the prerogative of the employer and merely because any criteria does not suit any candidate, the same cannot be held to be ultra vires for the reason that it exclude some of the candidates, as such the writ petition deserves to be dismissed and also for the reason that the petitioner having participated in the selection process pursuant to the advertisement issued and his candidature having been declared rejected has later-on taking a calculative chance, chosen to challenge the constitutional validity of the rule. As such, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.