SANJAY KUMAR TYAGI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 7.12.2000 of a learned Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 23192 of 1998 by which the writ petition was allowed and the approval granted by the District Basic Education Officer, Meerut to the appointment of Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, the appellant in the present Special Appeal was quashed and a direction was issued to hold a fresh selection for appointment to the post of Headmaster in the Adarsh Janta Junior High School, Krishna Nagar, Ganga Khadar, Hastinapur, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as 'the Junior High School') in accordance with the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Recognised Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1978 Rules'). The sole question that arose for consideration in the writ petition was whether a teacher possessing the B. Ed. certificate could be considered eligible for appointment to the post of Headmaster of a recognised Junior High School under the provisions of Rule 4(2) (b) of the 1978 Rules.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the Junior High School is recognised and aided though managed by a private Managing Committee and that the conditions of service of teachers are governed by the 1978 Rules. The recommendations of the Selection Committee in favour of the appellant for appointment to the post of Headmaster were accepted by the Managing Committee and subsequently the Basic Shiksha Adhikari also granted approval to his appointment on 26.3.1998. A letter was thereafter issued on 27.3.1998 appointing the appellant to the post of Headmaster in the Junior High School. This appointment was challenged by another teacher of the Junior High School, namely, Dharamveer Singh who is respondent No. 4 in this Special Appeal on the ground that the appellant did not possess the requisite minimum qualification since he did not possess the Teaching Training Course recognised by the State Government or the Board as provided for in Rule 4(2) (b) of the 1978 Rules. The appellant had to his credit the B. Ed. certificate, which according to the petitioner-respondent did not satisfy the requirement. The learned Judge, after a careful analysis of the various provisions of the 1978 Rules came to the conclusion that the B.Ed. certificate possessed by the appellant was not a Teacher's Training Course recognised by the State Government or the Board and, therefore, he did not possess the minimum qualification for being considered for appointment to the post of Headmaster. The appointment order was accordingly quashed.

(3.) We have heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri P.R. Ganguly and Sri Sudhakar Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the respondents and have perused the materials available on record.