Showing posts with label Uttrakhand TET. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Uttrakhand TET. Show all posts

Saturday, March 5, 2016

UTET : CM ने दिए निर्देश, शिक्षकों से न ‌की जाय वसूली जूनियर हाईस्कूल के सहायक अध्यापक और प्राथमिक के हेड मास्टर को विभाग की ओर से वर्ष 2006 से 17140 बेसिक वेतन दिया जा रहा था, लेकिन विभाग ने हाल ही में इसे निरस्त कर दिया। विभागीय अधिकारियों का कहना था कि सीधी भर्ती के सहायक अध्यापकों के पदों पर ही 17140 का लाभ दिया जाएगा

UTET :   

CM ने दिए निर्देश, शिक्षकों से न ‌की जाय वसूली

जूनियर हाईस्कूल के सहायक अध्यापक और प्राथमिक के हेड मास्टर को विभाग की ओर से वर्ष 2006 से 17140 बेसिक वेतन दिया जा रहा था, लेकिन विभाग ने हाल ही में इसे निरस्त कर दिया। विभागीय अधिकारियों का कहना था कि सीधी भर्ती के सहायक अध्यापकों के पदों पर ही 17140 का लाभ दिया जाएगा

ब्यूरो शनिवार, 5 मार्च 2016
, देहरादूनUpdated @ 2:38 PM IST
CM orders to not recovery from teachers.
शिक्षक की हार्टअटैक से मौत
उत्तराखंड बोर्ड परीक्षा में आए आ‌पत्तिजनक प्रश्न से टीचर चकराए
शिक्षकों को अधिक वेतन भुगतान की वसूली पर विभाग ने रोक लगा दी है। मुख्यमंत्री के निर्देश के बाद शिक्षा निदेशक की ओर से प्रदेश के समस्त जिला शिक्षा अधिकारियों को इसके निर्देश जारी किए गए हैं।

निदेशक ने जारी निर्देश में कहा कि मूल वेतन 17140 पर जब तक कोई अंतिम फैसला नहीं होता जब तक शिक्षकों से वसूली न की जाए।

जूनियर हाईस्कूल के सहायक अध्यापक और प्राथमिक के हेड मास्टर को विभाग की ओर से वर्ष 2006 से 17140 बेसिक वेतन दिया जा रहा था, लेकिन विभाग ने हाल ही में इसे निरस्त कर दिया। विभागीय अधिकारियों का कहना था कि सीधी भर्ती के सहायक अध्यापकों के पदों पर ही 17140 का लाभ दिया जाएगा।

विभाग के इस आदेश के बाद शिक्षकों को दिए गए अधिक वेतन की वसूली शुरू कर दी गई थी। कई शिक्षकों को तो सेवानिवृत्ति के दौरान उनके वेतन से ढाई से तीन लाख रुपये तक की कटौती की गई। विभाग की इस कार्यप्रणाली से प्रदेश के शिक्षकों में नाराजगी थी।

शिक्षकों का कहना है कि समस्त जूनियर हाईस्कूलों के सहायक अध्यापकों की ग्रेड पे 4600 है, इसलिए उन्हें 17140 का लाभ दिया जाना चाहिए। शिक्षक संघ की ओर से हाल ही में मामले को मुख्यमंत्री के सामने रखे जाने के बाद मुख्यमंत्री ने शिक्षकों के वेतन से वसूली पर रोक के आदेश दिए।

इसके बाद विभाग की ओर से अब इसके निर्देश जारी कर दिए गए हैं। शिक्षा निदेशक सीमा जौनसारी की ओर से जारी निर्देश में कहा गया है कि फिलहाल शिक्षकों के वेतन से वसूली न की जाए। 

शिक्षकों के वेतन से गलत तरीके से वसूली की जा रही थी। जूनियर हाईस्कूलों के समस्त शिक्षकों को 17140 का लाभ पूर्व की तरह मिलता रहना चाहिए।
-सतीश घिल्डियाल, संयुक्त मंत्री जूनियर हाईस्कूल शिक्षक संघ


News Sabhar : अमर उजाला








Saturday, July 25, 2015

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - Nainital High Court Correct Order - नियुक्ति अस्थायी होगी तथा यह स्पेशल अपील के निर्णय के अधीन -

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - Nainital High Court Correct Order -  नियुक्ति अस्थायी होगी तथा यह स्पेशल अपील के निर्णय के अधीन


हाईकोर्ट के फैसले से शिक्षा मित्रों को राहत - नियुक्ति अस्थायी होगी

relief for shiksha mitra.
नैनीताल हाईकोर्ट ने शिक्षा मित्रों को टीईटी में छूट प्रदान करने संबंधी शासनदेश के मामले में दायर स्पेशल अपील पर सुनवाई के बाद सरकार को आदेश दिया है कि शिक्षा मित्रों की यदि नियमित नियुक्ति की जाती है तो सरकार को नियुक्ति पत्र पर स्पष्ट उल्लेख करना होगा कि यह नियुक्ति अस्थायी होगी तथा यह स्पेशल अपील के निर्णय के अधीन होगी।

शिक्षा मित्रों को टीईटी से दी गई थी छूट
मामले की अगली सुनवाई 13 मार्च 2015 को होगी। मुख्य न्यायाधीश केएम जोसेफ एवं न्यायमूर्ति वीके बिष्ट की खंडपीठ के समक्ष मामले की सुनवाई हुई। मामले के अनुसार पूर्व में प्रवीण कुमार और अन्य ने हाईकोर्ट में याचिका दायर कर कहा था कि सरकार की ओर से शासनादेश जारी किया गया है जिसके तहत शिक्षा मित्रों को टीईटी से छूट प्रदान की गई थी।

इस शासनादेश को याचियों ने ने चुनौती दी थी। एकलपीठ ने सुनवाई के बाद शिक्षा मित्रों को टीईटी से छूट प्रदान करने के शासनादेश को निरस्त कर दिया था। एकलपीठ के इस आदेश को सरकार और अन्य शिक्षा मित्रों की ओर से स्पेशल अपील दायर कर चुनौती दी गई थी।

पक्षों को सुनवाई के बाद हाईकोर्ट की खंडपीठ ने सरकार को आदेश दिया है कि शिक्षा मित्रों को यदि नियमित नियुक्ति दी जाती है तो सरकार को नियुक्ति पत्र में स्पष्ट उल्लेख करना होगा कि उक्त नियुक्ति अस्थायी होगी तथा यह नियुक्ति स्पेशल अपील के निर्णय के अधीन होगी।

News source: ब्‍यूरो / अमर उजाला, नैनीताल Updated @ 9:12 AM IST

Kya Tha Single Bench Ka Decision :-
 बड़ी खबर : शिक्षा मित्रों को टी ई टी से छूट नहीं

 

 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825  Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Saturday, February 15, 2014

UTET : टीईटी-दो पास ही बनेंगे एलटी शिक्षक

UTET : टीईटी-दो पास ही बनेंगे एलटी शिक्षक


Uttrakhand TET UTET  / टीईटी Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Recruitment News


टीईटी-दो पास ही बनेंगे एलटी शिक्षक



देहरादून

प्रदेश में एलटी शिक्षकों की नियुक्ति में पेच सरकार ने दूर कर दिया है। कैबिनेट ने नई एलटी शिक्षक सेवा नियमावली को हरी झंडी दे दी। अब एलटी शिक्षक बनने के लिए टीईटी-दो परीक्षा पास करना अनिवार्य हो गया है। वहीं नई नियमावली में अब सीधी भर्ती का कोटा 70 फीसद से घटकर 60 फीसद रह गया, जबकि पदोन्नति कोटे ने 10 फीसद की छलांग लगाई।

कैबिनेट ने शुक्रवार को विद्यालय शिक्षा महकमे में उत्तराखंड अधीनस्थ शिक्षा (प्रशिक्षित स्नातक श्रेणी) सेवा नियमावली पर मुहर लगाकर प्रदेश में फिलवक्त एलटी शिक्षकों के रिक्त 3978 पदों को भरने का रास्ता साफ कर दिया है। नई नियमावली में शिक्षा का अधिकार (आरटीई) एक्ट के तहत अनिवार्य की गई व्यवस्था शामिल की गई है। एक्ट में कक्षा छह से आठवीं कक्षा को पढ़ाने वाले शिक्षक के लिए टीईटी-दो पास होना अनिवार्य किया गया है। मौजूदा एलटी नियमावली में यह प्रावधान नहीं है। लिहाजा नई नियमावली को आरटीई एक्ट के अनुकूल बनाया गया है। बेसिक शिक्षा के राजकीयकरण के बाद जूनियर हाईस्कूल के पात्र शिक्षकों को पदोन्नति के मौके देने को मौजूदा नियमावली में पदोन्नति कोटा 25 फीसद है। पांच फीसद कोटा विभागीय सीधी भर्ती परीक्षा का है। नई नियमावली में प्राइमरी स्कूल प्रधानाध्यापक और जूनियर हाईस्कूल सहायक अध्यापक से एलटी संवर्ग में पदोन्नति कोटा 25 फीसद से बढ़ाकर 30 फीसद और विभागीय परीक्षा के माध्यम से कोटा बढ़ाकर 10 फीसद किया गया है। पदोन्नति कोटा 40 फीसद हो गया है। अब एलटी शिक्षक की सीधी भर्ती का कोटा 60 फीसद तय किया गया है।

यही नहीं एलटी संवर्ग के लिए विषयवार शैक्षिक अर्हता निर्धारित की गई हैं। पहले विषय समूहों को लेकर भ्रम की स्थिति बनी रहती थी, नई व्यवस्था में इसे स्पष्ट किया गया है। नई नियमावली को मंजूरी मिलने के बाद अब एलटी शिक्षकों के रिक्त पदों पर भर्ती और पदोन्नति की राह आसान हो गई है। बीते रोज सदन में सरकार ने भरोसा दिलाया था कि एलटी नियमावली पास होने के बाद रिक्त पदों पर जल्द भर्ती की जाएगी

News Source / Sabhaar : Jagran (Sat, 15 Feb 2014 01:01 AM (IST))

Saturday, May 25, 2013

LT GRADE Teacher Recruitment : केंद्र सरकार ने झटका दिया - एलटी नियुक्ति को टीईटी-दो अनिवार्य


 LT GRADE Teacher Recruitment : केंद्र सरकार ने झटका दिया - एलटी नियुक्ति को टीईटी-दो अनिवार्य

  UTET /  UPTET - Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Recruitment News

Similar requirement of TET Qualification happens for TGT Recruitment in KVS (Kendriya Vidyalay Sangathan) and Delhi State Govt. Recruitment DSSSB etc.

See news  -
देहरादून : प्रदेश में एलटी शिक्षक के रूप में नियुक्ति की राह तक रहे हजारों बीएड प्रशिक्षितों को केंद्र सरकार ने झटका दिया है। उन्हें शिक्षक पात्रता परीक्षा (टीईटी) से निजात नहीं मिलने वाली। रोजगार के लिए उन्हें भी टीईटी-दो अनिवार्य रूप से पास करना होगा। केंद्र सरकार के इस फरमान के बाद अब राज्य को एलटी नियमावली में संशोधन करना होगा। शिक्षा महकमा इस कवायद में जुट गया है। इस वजह से टीईटी परीक्षा भी अब जल्द कराने की तैयारी है।

प्रदेश में एलटी शिक्षकों के चार हजार से ज्यादा पद रिक्त हैं। सिर्फ राष्ट्रीय माध्यमिक शिक्षा अभियान के तहत खुले 228 स्कूलों में शिक्षकों के तकरीबन दो हजार पद रिक्त हैं। इन पदों पर नियुक्ति के लिए भी अब बीएड प्रशिक्षितों को टीईटी-दो पास करना होगा। दरअसल, एलटी शिक्षक कक्षा छह से दसवीं कक्षा तक पढ़ाते हैं। छठवीं, सातवीं और आठवीं कक्षा इसके दायरे में होने के कारण केंद्र सरकार ने एलटी नियुक्तियों में भी टीईटी-दो को अनिवार्य किया है। इस बाबत राज्य सरकार ने केंद्र सरकार को पत्र भेजा। अब केंद्र सरकार ने राज्य को पत्र भेजकर इस संबंध में स्थिति साफ कर दी है। केंद्र सरकार ने एलटी नियुक्तियों के लिए टीईटी-दो को अनिवार्य बताया है। मौजूदा व्यवस्था में एलटी शिक्षकों की नियुक्ति के लिए टीईटी-दो पास करने का प्रावधान नहीं है। कक्षा छह से आठवीं तक अध्यापकों के सीटी संवर्ग को काफी पहले मृत संवर्ग घोषित कर एलटी संवर्ग में समायोजित किया जा चुका है।

एलटी नियुक्तियों के लिए टीईटी-दो पास करने की व्यवस्था अभी एलटी नियमावली में नहीं है। लिहाजा नियमावली में संशोधन किया जाएगा। केंद्र का फरमान मिलने के बाद राज्य सरकार के लिए फिलहाल असहज स्थितियां बन गई हैं। सरकार अब बोर्ड परीक्षा का मूल्यांकन कार्य निपटने के बाद टीईटी और टीईटी-दो जल्द आयोजित करने की तैयारियों में जुट गई है। शिक्षा सचिव मनीषा पंवार ने एलटी नियुक्तियों के लिए टीईटी-दो अनिवार्य किए जाने के केंद्र सरकार के निर्देशों की पुष्टि की। उन्होंने कहा कि एलटी की नई नियुक्तियां नई व्यवस्था के तहत होंगी। इसके लिए नियमावली में संशोधन किया जा रहा है। उन्होंने स्वीकार किया कि टीईटी जल्द आयोजित की जाएगी


News Source / Sabhaar : Jagran (Updated on: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:34 AM (IST))

Sunday, May 13, 2012

UTET / Uttrakhand TET : Naineetal Highcourt Disposed All 371 writ petitions



UTET / Uttrakhand TET : Naineetal Highcourt Disposed All 371 writ petitions

See Cases ( Information provided by Blog Visitor Mohd. Rashid )
For Authentic Details , Contact Highcourt of Uttrakhand/ Relevant Authority


IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 1582 (SS) of 2011
Himanshu Upadhyay and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1586 (SS) of 2011
Bharti Bisht and another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Kishore Kumar, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1590 (SS) of 2011
Neeraj Kumar Pal & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deep Chand Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1593 (SS) of 2011
Chandan Ram and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
2
With
Writ Petition No. 1594 (SS) of 2011
Mukund Ballabh Pandey and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Chetan Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1595 (SS) of 2011
Uma Pandey & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1597 (SS) of 2011
Rajesh Pandey & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. D.K. Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1598 (SS) of 2011
Kripal Singh & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. H.S. Rawal, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
3
With
Writ Petition No. 1601 (SS) of 2011
Himanshu Kumar Bhaisora & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1602 (SS) of 2011
Vijay Kumar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1603 (SS) of 2011
Murari Lal & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Jaivardhan Kandpal, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1604 (SS) of 2011
Suraj Singh Dasila & …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
4
With
Writ Petition No. 1606 (SS) of 2011
Manoj Kumar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. D.K. Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1607 (SS) of 2011
Sanjay Kumar Sandoya & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1608 (SS) of 2011
Vikram Singh & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Ravindra Singh Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1609 (SS) of 2011
Smt. Meena Mahar …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate present for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
5
With
Writ Petition No. 1610 (SS) of 2011
Arvind Kumar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Raveendra Singh Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1612 (SS) of 2011
Mahipal Chand and another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Bhuvnesh Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1615 (SS) of 2011
Suresh Chandra Singh & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1617 (SS) of 2011
Bishan Singh & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
6
With
Writ Petition No. 1618 (SS) of 2011
Neelam & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Bhupendra Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1619 (SS) of 2011
Pushpa and another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1621 (SS) of 2011
Suresh Chandra & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1623 (SS) of 2011
Rajeev Rawat & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
7
With
Writ Petition No. 1627 (SS) of 2011
Sompal Singh Bavaria & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Anil Dabral, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1628 (SS) of 2011
Jaywant Singh & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1629 (SS) of 2011
Harish Kumar and & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deepa Arya, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1630 (SS) of 2011
Mukesh Chandra Upadhyay & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Navnish Negi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
8
With
Writ Petition No. 1631 (SS) of 2011
Rajiv Rawat & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1632 (SS) of 2011
Chandra Shekhar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Raveendra Singh Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1633 (SS) of 2011
Pranil Kumar Joshi & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1637 (SS) of 2011
Bishan Ram & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Puran Singh Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
9
With
Writ Petition No. 1639 (SS) of 2011
Bhupendra Mohan Pant & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1642 (SS) of 2011
Manoj Pant & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Chetan Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1643 (SS) of 2011
Jagdamba Khanduri & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. T.P.S. Takuli, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1646 (SS) of 2011
Dalveer Kaur …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate present for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
10
With
Writ Petition No. 1647 (SS) of 2011
Ravi Kumar …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Raveendra Singh Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1648 (SS) of 2011
Vinod Khulbe & another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Swapnil Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1651 (SS) of 2011
Neeraj Kumar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1652 (SS) of 2011
Rajendra Kumar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. T.P.S. Takuli, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
11
With
Writ Petition No. 1655 (SS) of 2011
Ragini Joshi …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. P.C. Petshali, Advocate present for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1656 (SS) of 2011
Om Prakash & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1658 (SS) of 2011
Rajesh Chandra & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Shivanand Bhatt, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1659 (SS) of 2011
Rakesh Kumar & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. P.C. Petshali, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
12
With
Writ Petition No. 1661 (SS) of 2011
Pradeep Chandra Pandey & others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1662 (SS) of 2011
Pushpa Kumar & another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Raveendra Singh Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1664 (SS) of 2011
Gaurav Kumar …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate present for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1667 (SS) of 2011
Sundar Singh …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
13
With
Writ Petition No. 1669 (SS) of 2011
Kailash Chandra Gwasikoti & another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1670 (SS) of 2011
Sanjay Kumar …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Narain Dutt, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1671 (SS) of 2011
Usha Rani …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Narain Dutt, Advocate present for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1672 (SS) of 2011
Sikha Gupta and another …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. H.S. Rawal, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
14
With
Writ Petition No. 1673 (SS) of 2011
Bitina Kumar and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Navnish Negi, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1675 (SS) of 2011
Rajeev Kandpal …Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Amish Tiwari, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1676 (SS) of 2011
Manish Bagdwal and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
With
Writ Petition No. 1679 (SS) of 2011
Rajesh Nautiyal and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Jayvardhan Kandpal, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
15
And
Writ Petition No. 1680 (SS) of 2011
Berendra Singh Chauhan and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents
Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate present for the petitioners.
Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder present for the State of Uttarakhand.
Ms. Seema Sah, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocate for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for National Council for Teacher Education.
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
1. Heard Mr. Deepak Bisht, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Anil Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand, and Ms. Seema Sah, Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, respectively for “Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad” as well as Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate present for National Council for Teacher Education.
2. In all these connected writ petitions a common question is involved and the respective counsels appearing for the “Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad”, namely, Ms. Seema Sah, Ms. Geeta Parihar, and Mr. Asif Ali, Advocates, which is the necessary party in the present writ petitions fairly submit that the writ petitions be disposed of at the admission stage itself for the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Although all the writ petitions are being disposed of by the present orders, the facts of the case which has been mentioned are of Writ Petition No. 1582 (SS) of 2011, only for the sake of convenience.
4. All the petitioners before this Court are the candidates for an examination known as Teachers Eligibility Test (hereafter referred to as “TET”). This examination was conducted under the directions of a Central Body known as National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as “NCTE”) by which the State Government was to conduct such an examination, which is known as Uttarakhand Teachers Eligibility Test (hereinafter referred to as “UTET”). A candidate who is desirous to become a teacher in an elementary school must qualify with at least 60% of marks (for General Category candidates), and for the reserved category candidates they must qualify this examination with a minimum 50% marks. This would be one of the eligibilities for a teacher in elementary schools, in the State of Uttarakhand. This has been done after the Right to Education being incorporated in Constitution of India under Article 21-A vide Constitution (Eighty Sixth Amendment Act) and consequently, the Parliament enacting an Act known as “Right to Education Act, 2009” whereby, inter alia, it has been stipulated that it is the Right of a child not only to get an elementary education but a “meaningful elementary education.” Pursuant to the direction of NCTE the State of Uttarakhand invited the applications from eligible candidates to appear in “TET” examination. One of the conditions imposed by the State Government in the examination (under the direction of NCTE) is that a candidate who possesses B.Ed. qualification will only be eligible to appear in the present examination, if he has at least 50% in graduation, for general category candidates and 45% for reserved category candidates.
5. Thereafter, a large number of writ petitions were filed before this Court challenging both the authority of the NCTE as well as the State Government to conduct such an examination (i.e. TET), and more particularly the imposition of a condition of having a minimum percentage of marks in graduation a candidate having
B.Ed. qualification. These writ petitions were filed by the petitioners in which leading case was Writ Petition No. 772 (SS) of 2011 (Baldev Singh and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others) was decided by an order dated 20.8.2011, holding the validity of TET and rejecting the claim of the petitioners regarding holding of such examination. At the same time, this Court also held that fixing the minimum percentage of marks in graduation for this examination has actually no nexus with the object sought to be achieved and therefore, the writ petitions were disposed of with certain directions. It was held that such a restriction (of having minimum percentage in graduation) is both unreasonable, unjust and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, this Court declared such a condition of asking a minimum percentage of marks in graduation from candidates having B.Ed. qualification was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Further this Court directed the respondent to permit the petitioners to appear in TET, Examination treating them to be qualified.
6. At this juncture, it is necessary to state that Board, NCTE and consequently, the State Government had also during the pendency of the above writ petitions had reduced the percentage of marks from 50% to 45% for general category candidates and from 45% to 40% for the reserved category candidates.
7. This Court has also been informed that State Government as well as NCTE has not filed any special appeal against this judgment before this Court nor any petition before the Hon’ble Apex Court. Therefore, the above referred judgment has attained a finality. As such, candidates are held to be eligible to appear in the examination and there is no reason to withhold the result of such candidates merely because the petitioners were not party in the above writ petitions. This Court has been informed that such candidates who have appeared in the examination are either being treated to be disqualified or their results have been withheld who have less than minimum prescribed percentage in their graduation. It has further been submitted before this Court that all these candidates are being compelled to obtain orders from this Court, hence these writ petitions.
8. In view of this, this inaction on the part of the respondents is highly unreasonable and has caused undue hardship to the petitioners. The judgment of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 772 (SS) of 2011 was a judgment of the candidates having judgment in rem and not a judgment in persona.
9. Counsel appearing for the Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksha Parishad has filed a letter dated 23.11.2011, which is taken on record, which has been received through Secretary, “Uttarakhand Vidyalayi Shiksah Parishad” in which the respondents state that to a certain extent the Board has accepted its mistake and clarified its position now and on a mere representation by the petitioners the result of such candidates (like the present petitioners) is liable to be declared. However, there should be no such need for any such formality being asked from the petitioners, in case the petitioners had a recognized B.Ed. qualification, they shall be treated to be qualified irrespective of the marks they had obtained in their graduation provided they are graduates from a duly recognized University. Nothing, further needs to be stated by this Court.
10. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petitions are allowed.
11. No order as to costs.
12. Certified copy of this order be issued today itself.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)
Dated: 25.11.2011


Source :
From: rashid azad <rashid.khurshid@gmail.com>
Date: 2012/5/13
Subject: HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND- NAINITAL
To: rajesh rao <rajeshrow86@gmail.com>, nnitinmehta1982@rediffmail.com, dev02019654@gmail.com, Muskan Bharat <muskan24by7@gmail.com>,
**********************
One more information file sent by Mr. Rashid is  :


WPSS No. 1888 of 2011
With
CLMA No. 41 of 2012
CLMA No. 163 of 2012
CLMA No. 167 of 2012
Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.
Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for the State.
Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Advocate for the intervener.
The petitioners will file counter affidavit to the impleadment applications as well as intervention application within a week.
The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents is allowed a week’s time to file the counter affidavit.
The learned counsel appearing for N.C.T.E. is also allowed a week’s time to file the counter affidavit.
This order will apply in all the connected writ petitions and separate order need not be passed.
List immediately after the expiry of the aforesaid period.
Interim order, if any, will continue till the next date of listing.
(Tarun Agarwala, J.)
Dated 22.02.2012
Shiv