ARTI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order dated 26.7.2010, Annexure P.8, vide which the services of the petitioner have been terminated after a gap of more than four years is subject matter of challenge in the present petition. It has been mentioned in the impugned order that the petitioner is not possessing the qualification of ETT but possessing the qualification of B.A, B.Ed and is not eligible.

(2.) AN advertisement was issued on 4.3.2006 inviting applications to fill up the post of Primary School Teachers in the Rural Schools. The qualification prescribed for the said post was 10+2 with ETT. It was mentioned in the advertisement that in case of non availability of ETT candidates, the candidates with qualifications of B.A.,B.Ed would be considered and they were required to undergo orientation training of six months within a period of five years from the date of joining the service. The petitioner being eligible and possessing qualification of B.A., B.Ed applied for the post as per requirement of the advertisement and was selected as well as appointed by the respondents. On 17.11.2009, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to file reply which was duly replied by the petitioner wherein it was clearly mentioned that she had applied for the post of ETT teacher and all her documents were duly checked/verified by the respondent department and nothing was concealed by the petitioner. On the basis of her qualification, she was selected and subsequently appointed. Termination, after gap of four years is totally unjustified and unfair. After considering the reply of the petitioner, her services were terminated by the respondent department vide order dated 26.7.2010 on the ground that her reply had not been found satisfactory as she was not possessing ETT qualification.

(3.) IN response to the notice of motion, reply was filed on behalf of the respondents which is on record.