ANIL KUMAR CHOUHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the action of the respondents for treating petitioner to be ineligible for the post of Teacher Gr. III. It is on the ground that he has not passed out Rajasthan Teacher Eligibility Test (for short "RTET") ignoring the fact that petitioner has passed out Central Teacher Eligibility Test (for short "CTET"), thus should have been held eligible for selection to the post of Teacher Gr. III.

(2.) It is submitted that after amendment in the constitution making elementary education as a fundamental right, Union of India came with the legislation namely Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short "Act of 2009"). Section 23 of the Act of 2009 provides about qualification for appointment and terms & condition of service of teachers. As per Sub-section 1 of Section 23 of the Act of 2009, the Central Government is given powers to authorize academic authority to lay down minimum qualification. As per the aforesaid provision, the Central Government issued a Notification authorizing the National Council for Teacher Education (for short "NCTE") as academic authority to prescribe minimum qualification for appointment of teachers. The NCTE accordingly issued a Notification on 23rd August, 2010 providing minimum qualification for appointment of teachers. The said Notification divides teachers at two levels, i. e. , Level I and Level II. As per the qualification given therein, one is required to pass TET to be conducted by the appropriate government in accordance with the guidelines of the NCTE. The NCTE issued guidelines on 11th February, 2011 directing all the appropriate governments to conduct TET. Para 10 of the order dated 11th February, 2012 is relevant for the controversy involved in the present matter. It provides that TET conducted by the Central Government shall apply to all the schools referred in Sub clause (i) (a) of Section 2 of RTE Act. Para 10 (b) talks about the TET conducted by a State Government/UT, however, below clause (b), it is provided that in case State Government/UT with legislature does not conduct TET then that State may consider TET conducted by the Central Government. According to the petitioner, TET conducted by the Central Government and passed out by the petitioner fulfills required condition of eligibility as notified on 23rd August, 2010 by NCTE and otherwise, guidelines for TET issued on 11.02.2011. The respondents, however, acting contrary to the aforesaid, treated petitioner to be ineligible for want of RTET ignoring the qualification of CTET possessed by the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has given reference of Notification dated 29th July, 2011 to indicate that modification in the eligibility also provide that TET should be passed out by a candidate, which is to be conducted by an appropriate government in accordance to the guidelines and herein, appropriate government is Central Government, thus passing out CTET by the petitioner should be taken in sufficiency of required eligibility. The writ petition may be allowed with the direction to the respondents to treat petitioner as eligible being in possession of qualification of CTET.