SEEMA RANI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court has challenged, by means of the present writ petition, the appointment of respondent no.5. as a Lecturer in Arts in a private college (though grant-in-aid College), namely, K.L.D.A.V. Inter College, Roorkee, Haridwar.

(2.) A vacancy of Lecturer (Arts) fell vacant in the aforesaid College prior to 5th June, 2012. On 5th June, 2012, an advertisement was issued by the Committee of Management of the College. Admittedly, the essential qualification for appointment as Lecturer (Arts) are Masters in the concerned subject, which in the present case is Arts (Drawing and Painting) and B.Ed. As per the procedure, the candidates had to make applications as per the prescribed format and these applications were to be filed in the office of Chief Education Officer which in the present case is the Chief Education Officer, Haridwar and thereafter the applications were to be scrutinized and quality points were given to each of the applicants in case they are found eligible for the post of Lecturer. Thereafter, top 07 candidates who had submitted their names along with the documents were forwarded to the concerned Committee of Management which subsequently examined these 07 candidates by way of a viva-voce and awarded marks out of maximum marks prescribed for the interview. A candidate is evaluated on the basis of his or her academic record, such as (i) High School, (ii) Inter, (iii) Graduation, (iv) Post Graduation, and (v) Training (which in the present case would be B.Ed.). Thereafter, 02 marks are liable to be given to a candidate for each year of teaching experience in secondary classes as a teacher, though the maximum points for teaching experience which would be awarded are 25. If a candidate has got Master's Degree in Education he is to be given 05 additional quality points. The case of the petitioner is that though she has a teaching experience of more than 12 years and, therefore, was liable to be given 24 marks for her teaching experience she has only been given 08 marks for teaching experience.

(3.) Another grievance of the petitioner is that she has not been given quality points for her M.Ed. for which she was liable to be given 05 additional quality point marks. The fact that such marks were liable to be given to the petitioner is not in dispute as the respondents have not questioned her teaching experience of 12 years or the fact that she has M.Ed. qualification. The reply of the State as well as the Committee of Management is basically evasive on these two issues. The defence taken by the State is that the petitioner had not submitted her teaching experience in a prescribed format. What the prescribed format ought to be has not been explained. The petitioner on the other hand has drawn the attention of this Court to the experience Certificate granted to the petitioner by the District Education Officer wherein it has been clearly mentioned that the petitioner has experience of 12 years 04 months and 03 days. There is another Certificate which clearly states that the petitioner has joined at her present school at Government Higher Secondary School, Rehabilitated Area, Pashulok, Rishikesh as Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) where she has been continuously teaching since 16.05.2008.