RAM CHANDRA SWAMI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, holders of State Trade Certificates (Cutting and Tailoring) (hereinafter referred to as STC (C&T) have filed this writ petition with the averments, in short that the de-recognition of STC (C&T) as equivalent to Basic School Training Certificate (BSTC) is null and void and recognition of the diploma of the Art and Craft of Vidhya Bhawan Institute, Udaipur as equivalent to BSTC and not of the STC (C&T) is discriminatory and praying that the opposite parties be directed to consider their candidature for the posts of primary school teacher treating their certificates of STC (C&T) as equivalent to BSTC. In view of the conflicting decisions of this Court on the point of equivalence of the STC (C&T) with BSTC and the subsequent decisions of the Honourable Supreme Court given in Andhra Kesri Educational Society Vs. Director, School Education, AIR 1989 Supreme Court 183 and Ram Sukh Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, AIR 1990 Supreme Court 2592 , holding that training in teaching is essential for a primary school teacher, the learned Single Judge referred the matter to the Honourable Chief Justice for constitution of larger bench to decide the following legal issue:-

(2.) To avoid confusion, it may be mentioned here that the course which used to be imparted to the candidates preparing for teaching primary school students was earlier known as Basic School Training Certificate (BSTC) Course and also as School Training Certificate (STC) course. It is now known as (sic). The various Courses of Trades which are conducted by State Council for Vocational Training and National Council for Vocational Training are known as State Trade Certificate (STC)/National Trade Certificate (NTC) Courses.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners raised preliminary objection that there was no necessity for making this reference, it is incompetent and as such it should not be answered. He contended that the point regarding the said equivalence was first of all decided in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2664/87 Harpal Vs. State, on 19.1.88 and subsequently in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3250/88 Jagdish Vs. State , and Writ Petition No. 3251/88, Jessa Ram Vs. State, decided by a common order dated 26.5.89 , the earlier decision given in Harpal's case was not considered in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1458/88, Babulal Vs. State, decided on Nov. 17, 1988 taking contrary view, thereafter, there have been several decisions taking the view similar to the view taken in Harpal's case and the judgment given in Babulal's case was per incurium and as such it is not binding. He relied upon Anil Kumar Vs. Union of India, AIR 1988 Supreme Court 1353, The Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association Vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1990 Supreme Court 1607 , Jaiwant Rao Vs. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1961 Supreme Court 250 , Deva Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan, 1984 RLW 184 and Nityanandan Kar Vs. State of Orissa, 1991(1) SCT 105 (SC) : AIR 1991 Supreme Court 1134. It was next contended by him that the courts do not decide academic and technical questions regarding the equivalence of one course with the other course. He relied upon Rajendra Prasad Mathur Vs. Karnataka University AIR 1986 Supreme Court 1448. He further contended that the decision given by a Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 177/90 State Vs. Shyamlal, decided on 12.9.90 has been challenged by the State Government in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 3495/91 and the petitioner Babulal has also filed a Special Leave Petition against the said decision of this Court before the Honourable Supreme Court, they are likely to be heard in near future and as such the reference need not be answered. It was also contended that Item No. 2 of the Schedule of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Service Rules (in short 'the Rules') simply mentions 'Matric Trained' as the qualification for the post of primary school teacher, the word 'trained' is of very wide amplitude and it is not confined to BSTC only. He further contended that the State Government had issued order No. 96 (63) Sa. Pra. Sa. 71 dated Feb. 8, 1973 (Annexure 11) recognising the Diploma issued by the Vidhya Bhawan Handicrafts Institute Udaipur in Art and Handicrafts as equivalent to BSTC, order No. F. 9(5) GA/111/74 dated Dec. 11, 1974 (Annexure P/1) recognising the certificates of Industrial Examinations of the Rajasthan Government equivalent to Art and Handicraft diploma of Vidhya Bhawan, Udaipur and letter No. F. 39/14/Gr.II/siksha/91 dated Nov. 19, 1987 (paper No. A11/38) directing that the holders of State Trade Certificate (STC (C&T)) may be appointed as Primary School Teachers in general category. He also contended that the courses taught during the training of BSTC and STC are the same and the de-reorganition of STC(C&T)/NTC(C&T) as equivalent to BSTC is void, being discriminatory. He lastly contended that in Civil Writ Petition No. 2664/87 Harpal Vs. State, decided on 19.11.88 , (2) D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3250/88 Jagdish Vs. State, decided on 26.5.89 , (3) D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3251/88 Jessa Ram Vs. State, decided on 26.5.89 , (4) D.B. Special Appeal No. 177/190 State Vs. Shyamlal, decided on 12.9.90 , (5) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5798/91 Rajaram Vs. State, decided on 22.1.92 , (6) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1614/89 Shyamlal Joshi Vs. State, decided on 12.1.90, (7) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 64/91 Manoharlal Tailor Vs. State, decided on 23.1.92 , (8) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 537/89 Jagdish Prasad Vs. State , similar Writ Petitions, decided on 23.6.91 , (9) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1614/86 Shaktiraj Singh Vs. State , similar writ petitions, decided on 16.1.87, (10) Sohanlal Vs. State, 1992(1) WLR 63 (Raj) , (11) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1414/85 Narainlal Jat Vs. State, decided on 31.8.90 , (12) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 122192 Jita Ram Vs. State and (13) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3525/88 Jagdish Prasad Vs. State, decided on 1.9.89 , it has been held that State Trade Certificate (STC) and National Trade Certificate (NTC) are equivalent to Basic School Training Certificates (BSTC), the decision given in Babulal Vs. State, taking contrary view, has not rightly been followed and there exist no good ground for upsetting this well settled law.