KM SEEMA Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant assails the judgement of the learned Single Judge dated 25.8.2010 whereby her claim for being considered as a candidate for B.T.C. Training Course, 2010 under the Shiksha Mitra category, has been dismissed in view of various provisions of the relevant Government Orders applicable to the controversy, treating her to be ineligible on account of considerable break in service.

(2.) The appellant filed the writ petition giving rise to the present appeal praying for quashing of the communication dated 10.8.2010 issued by the District Institute of Education and Training (DIET), Meerut informing her that since she was not regularly and continuously working as a Shiksha Mitra and there was break in her service between 1.8.2009 to 14.2.2010, therefore, she could not be considered as a candidate under the Shiksha Mitra category by virtue of clause 2 of the advertisement published pursuant to the Government Order dated 14.5.2010. The learned Single Judge, after having discussed the entire facts as alleged came to the conclusion that since the appellant did not fulfill the requisite eligibility criteria and her continuity as Shiksha Mitra was visited by a long break in service, therefore, she was not entitled to the aforesaid benefit.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the aforesaid approach of the learned Single Judge is erroneous and even otherwise the Government Order dated 15.6.2007 on which reliance has been placed by the learned Single Judge, does not disqualify the appellant from availing the said benefit of weightage as a candidate under the 10% quota meant for the Shiksha Mitra category. Learned counsel further relies on the meaning of the word 'ADYATAN' as contained in the relevant Government Orders, which requires that candidates should be working as on the date of moving of the application, and the break as alleged would not disqualify the appellant. The learned counsel has cited the meaning as contained in the OXFORD HINDI-ENGLISH DICTIONARY and has also relied on the LEGAL GLOSSARY (1992 Edition) published by the Government of India to substantiate his submissions. He contends that the aforesaid word means "up-to-date" and therefore, functioning of a Shiksha Mitra should be construed as on the date of moving of the application and not a continuous functioning as suggested by the learned Standing Counsel. He further submits that the learned Single Judge has committed an error by assigning an incorrect meaning to the relevant provisions as contained in the Government Orders.