NINETTE PROENCA Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN the controversy involved in this petition arose, the petitioner was working as a Teacher in the primary section in the third respondent school, St. Josephs High School, Calangute. She is a Bachelor of Arts with special subject of English and also having a Degree in Education. The petitioner is also a holder of Diploma in French language from Alliance Francais. While so, the petitioner came across an advertisement in the daily Navhind Times dated 14th February, 1988, which was published by the third respondent school, notifying a vacancy of part-time permanent Post Graduate Teacher to teach Geography and French in Higher Classes. The advertisement reads as follows :-

(2.) THE petitioner alongwith three other persons applied for the post, including the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent was selected though she was not having B. Ed. qualification at the time of selection. Therefore, the third respondent management had to apply for relaxation of Training Qualification to the Director of Education under Rule 81 of the Goa, Daman and Diu School Education Rules, 1986, (hereinafter called "the Rules" ). As per the proceedings of the Director of Education dated 31st March, 1988, the approval was given for the appointment of the fourth respondent with a condition that the fourth respondent should attain the training qualification within five years. The petitioner challenges the selection and appointment of the fourth respondent in this writ petition.

(3.) IT is averred on behalf of the third respondent that though the fourth respondent was not having a B. Ed. qualification she was satisfying the subject requirement and therefore, the Selection Committee selected her. The minutes of the Selection Committee will go to show that all the candidates were asked to take class each in French and Geography and the same was observed by the Selection Committee members individually and points were awarded for introducing the lesson, explanation, questions, clarity and effectiveness. When all these points were totalled the fourth respondent scored highest. Strangely enough, it is also averred in the reply filed on behalf of the third respondents that after the four candidates gave their demonstration lessons to the students, the students were confidentially requested to give their preference and not even a single student had approved the petitioners lesson.