JENNI KHAIDEM Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri M. Hemchandra, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Th. Roson, the learned counsels, Shri N. Jotendro, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri L. Shyam, the learned counsels and Shri M. Devananda, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Shri N. Ibotombi, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Smt. N. Savitri, learned counsels appearing for the Board of Secondary Education, Manipur, Shri A. Bimol, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri H. Suraj, the learned counsels appearing for the UGC; Shri I. Lalitkumar, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondents in Cont. Case (C) No. 198 of 2016; Shri S. Nepolean, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents and Smt. N. Elizabeth, the learned counsel appearing for the NCTE.

(2.) There are altogether fourteen writ petitions which can be categorised into two groups - one, consisting of twelve writ petitions and two, consisting of two writ petitions. In view of the common issues involved in the said twelve writ petitions, all the said writ petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment and order. So far as the said two writ petitions being WP(C) No.1061 of 2016 and WP(C) No.33 of 2017 are concerned, separate order will be passed forming the common judgement and order. W.P. (C) No. 967 of 2016:

(3.) In this writ petition, the notification dated 03.11.2016 issued by the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur is being challenged by the petitioner. According to her, she being a B.Ed. degree holder is well qualified and eligible for appointment as a Graduate Teacher (RMSA). On 11.05.2016 the Directorate of Education (S), Government of Manipur issued a notification inviting applications from amongst the eligible candidates for recruitment of Graduate Teachers. The petitioner being eligible as aforesaid, applied for the posts of Arts Graduate Teacher and English Graduate Teacher and after having verified the documents and certificates submitted by her, Admit Card was issued to her by the Directorate of Education, Manipur. While she was waiting for participation in the recruitment process, the Director of Education (S), Government of Manipur issued the impugned notification dated 03.11.2016 thereby rejecting her candidature along with 314 others and the ground on the basis of which her candidature was rejected, was that the B.Ed. degree obtained by her was not recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education (hereafter referred to as "the NCTE"). Being aggrieved by the said impugned notification, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition inter-alia on the grounds that the institute, i.e., Bhartiya Shiksha Parisad (BSP) from where the petitioner obtained her B.Ed. degree certificate is an autonomous body recognized by the Uttar Pradesh Government which has been conducting various courses including Teachers Training Programmes such as D.EI.Ed./ B.Ed./ P.P.Ed./ M.Ed. etc. and in addition thereto, the Director, Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad addressed a letter dated 02-08-2016 to the Director, Education Department, Govt. of Manipur informing that the certificate issued by it is valid for purpose of employment. There is no provision in the National Council for Technical Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1993") requiring a University to take its approval from the NCTE to run teacher education courses and award degrees to pass out candidates and therefore, getting approval / recognition from the NCTE is not mandatory for any educational institutions to run teacher education courses. The act of cancelling the candidature of the petitioner by the respondents is arbitrary and illegal.