SARITA SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri V.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no. 3 and 4 and learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1, 2 and 5.

(2.) The present petition has been filed challenging the final select list dated 19.1.2015 with regard to selection for the post of Assistant Teacher in the Institution run by the Basic Education Board, Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the Clause 8 (Ga) of the advertisement dated 30.11.2011 as amended by advertisement dated 20.12.2011 issued by all the District Basic Education Officers in so far as it relates to the procedure of selection in selecting 50% of the candidates from the Arts group while 50% of the candidates with Science group of the total vacancy of the Assistant Teachers in Junior Basic Schools. A further prayer has also been made to fill up the vacancy in accordance with the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred as Rules, 1981).

(3.) The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance of the advertisement, the petitioner fulfills all the essential educational qualifications and training eligibility for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic Schools, as she is a B.Sc degree holder and also fulfills other relevant eligibility criteria. The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that in the Final Select List dated 19.1.2015, candidates in Arts group having less than 118 marks in Teacher Test Eligibility (TET) have been selected and whereas the petitioner who has also obtained 118 marks in TET, has not been selected and, therefore, it is a case of discrimination and is thus, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Clause 8(Ga) of the advertisement which provides that 50% candidates will be taken from Arts group and 50% candidates will be taken from Science group, is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and is discriminatory in nature and inasmuch as the other candidates in Arts group who have obtained less than 118 marks in TET have been selected whereas the petitioner has been left out. Drawing attention to Rule 8 of the Rules 1981, he further submitted that once the academic qualification is same i.e. graduation, irrespective of discipline i.e. Science or Arts, for all the candidates and all of them have attempted the same paper in TET, dividing source of recruitment in two category i.e. Science and Arts group by taking 50% from each category, is discriminatory.