The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.28289 of 2021 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950. ……………… Priyadarshinee Tripathy & Others …. -versus- Petitioners State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties For Petitioner : M/s.S.P. Mishra, S.G. Parija, S.K. Khandai, B.K. Sinha & P.K. Jena. For Opp. Parties : M/s. H.K. Panigrahi, Addl. Standing Counsel PRESENT: THE HONBLE JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Hearing: 02.11.2023 and Date of Judgment:02.11.2023 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J. 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the qualification prescribed for recruitment of contractual Hindi Teacher in Government Secondary School vide Resolution dtd.13.07.2021 under Annexure-2 and consequential advertisement issued on 13.08.2021 under Annexure-4. // 2 // 2.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that the qualification so prescribed for recruitment to the post of Contractual Hindi Teacher in Resolution dtd.13.07.2021 under Annexure-2, which was followed while issuing the advertisement by Opposite Party No.2 on 13.08.2021 under Annexure-4 is contrary to the Regulation prescribed by the National Council for Technical Education in short (NCTE). 2.1. It is also contended that the qualification prescribed for the post of Contractual Hindi Teacher in the Resolution under Annexure-2 and consequential advertisement issued under Annexure-4 is also contrary to the qualification prescribed by the self-same Government-Opposite Party No.1 in its earlier Resolution issued on 27.10.2014 under Annexure-3. 2.2. It is contended that in view of the qualification prescribed for the post of Contractual Hindi Teacher in the impugned Resolution dtd.13.07.2021 under Annexure-2 and consequential advertisement issued under Annexure-4, when the Petitioners were deprived to make the application as against the said post, the present writ petition was filed challenging such prescription of the qualification. 2.3. It is contended that this Court while issuing notice of the matter vide order dtd.14.09.2021 passed an interim Page 2 of 11 // 3 // order by permitting the Petitioners to apply in terms of the advertisement issued under Annexure-4 on off-line mode. This Court also directed Opposite Party No.2 to accept such application of the Petitioners and to permit them to appear in the selection process, but with the condition that the result shall not be declared without leave of this Court. 2.4. It is contended that in the Resolution issued on 27.10.2014 under Annexure-3 for the post of Hindi Teacher, the prescribed minimum qualification was as follows:- (45% aggregated 50% marks “(f) Hindi Teacher- Bachelor’s degree from a recognized University with Hindi as one of the elective subject with for in minimum SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) or with Rastrabhasa Ratna from Rastrabhasa Prachar Samiti, Wardha or with Sastri from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parisada, Puri or with Snataka (Acquired by June-2005, the date up to which the temporary recognition has been granted) from Hindi Sikshya Samiti, Orissa, Cuttack or an equivalent degree from a recognized Institution with at least 50% marks in aggregated (45% for SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) and Hindi from Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Sikshyan Parangat Agra/B.H.Ed. from a Institution recognized by NCTE and affiliated to a recognized university/B.Ed. in Hindi (a course prescribed by NCTE) from Dakhin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras, a Institution recognized by NCTE and affiliated to a recognized university (a course prescribed by NCTE) OR Bachelor’s degree with Hindi as one of the optional / Hons subject with minimum 50% of marks in aggregated ((45% for SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) and M.A in Hindi with minimum 50% marks in aggregated from a recognized University. (The untrained candidates shall have to undergo required training within the timeline as prescribed by Govt.)” Page 3 of 11 // 4 // But in the impugned Resolution dtd.13.07.2021 so issued under Annexure-2 and consequential advertisement issued on 13.08.2021 under Anneuxre-4, the prescribed qualification for the post of Hindi Teacher is as follows:- “Hindi Teacher 1. Bachelor’s degree from a recognized University with Hindi as one of the electives / Optional/Pass/Honours subject with minimum 50% marks in aggregated (45% for SC/ST/PWD/SEBC candidates) And One of the following Training qualifications. (a) Hindi Shikshan Parangat from Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Agra (b) B.H.Ed. a course prescribed by NCTE, from a recognized University/Institution (c) B.Ed. in Hindi, a course prescribed by NCTE, from Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras. OR 2. Bachelor’s degree from a recognized University with minimum for in SC/ST/PH/OBC/SEBC candidates) with one of the following qualifications; 50% marks aggregated (45% a) b) c) Rastrabhasa Ratna from Rastrabhasa Prachar Samiti, Wardha Shastri (Hindi) from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishad, Puri Snataka (Acquired by June-2005, the date up to which the temporary recognition has been granted) from Hindi Shiksha Samiti, Orissa, Cuttack And One of the following Training qualifications: (a) (b) (c) Hindi Shikshan Parangat from Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Agra B.H.E.D, a course prescribed by NCTE, from a recognized University/Institution B.Ed. in Hindi, a course prescribed by NCTE, from Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras” Page 4 of 11 // 5 // 2.5. It is contended that the qualification prescribed for the post of Hindi Teacher in the impugned advertisement dtd.13.08.2021 under Annexure-4 is contrary to the minimum qualification prescribed under the NCTE Regulation, 2014. 2.6. It is also contended that in view of the qualification prescribed in the impugned advertisement, the Petitioners though have the qualification of B.Ed. with Shastri (Hindi), from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishad, Puri, but they were not able to participate in the selection process as they do not possess the minimum percentage of marks in the Bachelor’s Degree Examination so prescribed. 2.7. It is contended that the Petitioners successfully completed the B.Ed. degree from Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras, which is a recognized institution under NCTE and they also possess the qualification of Shastri (Hindi) from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishada, Puri. But since the Petitioners do not have the required 50% mark in the Bachelor’s Degree Examination, which was not a condition in the earlier Resolution issued by the Government on 27.04.2014 under Annexure-3, Petitioners though possess all the requisite qualification but were debarred to make the application in terms of advertisement issued under Annexure-4. However, by virtue of the interim Page 5 of 11 // 6 // order passed by this Court on 14.09.2021, the Petitioners were allowed to make off-line applications and with due acceptance of such applications, Petitioners were allowed to take part in the selection process. But in view of the interim order passed on 14.09.2021, the result of the Petitioners has not yet been published. 2.8. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioners also contended that the qualification acquired by the Petitioners i.e. Shastri (Hindi) from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parisada, Puri, has also been declared as equivalent as Bachelor degree by the Utkal University so issued on 31.07.2012 under Annexure-5. 2.9. It is accordingly contended that since the qualification acquired by the Petitioners from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parisada, Puri i.e. Shastri with (Hindi) has been declared as equivalent as Bachelor’s degree by Utkal University, the Petitioners are also eligible to get the benefit of appointment. 2.10. Learned counsel for the Petitioners accordingly contended that necessary direction be issued to Opposite Party No.2 to publish the result of the Petitioners with due acceptance of their application and to provide them appointment if they are otherwise eligible. Page 6 of 11 // 7 // 3. Mr.H.K. Panigrahi, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed by Opposite Party No.2. It is contended that since admittedly the Petitioners do not have the requisite qualification for the post of Hindi Teacher as prescribed in the advertisement dtd.13.08.2021 under Annexure-4, the Petitioners were not eligible and entitled to make their application. But in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 14.09.2021, Opposite Party No.2 not only accepted off-line applications but also allowed the Petitioners to appear the test. 3.1. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel further contended that for the post of contractual Hindi Teacher, the prescribed qualification as prescribed in the advertisement dtd.13.08.2021 under Annexure-4 is bachelor’s degree from a recognized university with minimum 50% marks in aggregate (45% for SC, ST, PWD& SEBC candidates with one of the following qualification). Though, it is not disputed that the Petitioners possess the qualification of Sastri Hindi from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parisada and the training qualification i.e. B.Ed. in Hindi from Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras, but the Petitioners Page 7 of 11 // 8 // do not have the qualification of Bachelor’s degree from a recognized University with minimum 50% marks. 3.2. It is contended that since the Petitioners in terms of the advertisement do not have the requisites qualification of Bachelor’s degree with minimum 50% marks, they are not eligible and entitled to make their application for the post of contractual teacher in Hindi in terms of the advertisement dtd.13.08.2021 under Annexure-4. 3.3. It is contended that since the selecting authority has the prerogative to prescribe the qualification and it has been prescribed accordingly in the advertisement dtd.13.08.2021 under Annexure-4, the Petitioners cannot claim the benefit of relaxation of any stipulation so prescribed in the said advertisement. In support of his submission, learned Addl. Standing Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bedanga Talukdar vs. Saifudaullah Khan and Others reported in (2011) 12 SCC 85. Hon’ble Apex Court in Para-29 of the aforesaid judgment held as follows:- “29. We have considered the entire matter in detail. In our opinion, it is too well settled to need any further reiteration that all appointments to public office have to be made in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In other words, there must be no arbitrariness resulting from any undue favour being shown to any candidate. Therefore, the selection process has to be conducted strictly in accordance with the stipulated selection procedure. Page 8 of 11 // 9 // Consequently, when a particular schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the same has to be scrupulously maintained. There can not be any relaxation in the terms and conditions of the advertisement unless such a power is specifically reserved. Such a power could be reserved in the relevant Statutory Rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in the rules, it must still be mentioned in the advertisement. In the absence of such power in the Rules, it could still be provided in the advertisement. However, the power of relaxation, if exercised has to be given due publicity. This would be necessary to ensure that those candidates who become eligible due to the relaxation, are afforded an equal opportunity to apply and compete. Relaxation of any condition in advertisement without due publication would be contrary to the mandate of quality contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India”. 3.4. It is accordingly contended that the prayer as made in the writ petition is not entertainable and is liable to be rejected. 4. To the stand taken in the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the Petitioners made further submissions basing on the Addl. Affidavit filed by the Petitioners. It is contended that since in the earlier Resolution issued on dtd.27.10.2014, the prescribed qualification for the post of contractual Hindi Teacher, a candidate with having bachelor’s degree from a recognition university with Hindi as one of the elective subject with having the 50% marks or with Rastrabhasa Ratna from Rastrabhasa Prachar Samiti, Wardha or with Sastri from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishada, Puri was eligible to make the application for the post of contractual teacher Hindi, the change of such stipulation by indicating the qualification as Bachelor’s degree with Page 9 of 11 // 10 // 50% mark with Sastri from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishad is not sustainable in the eye of law. 4.1. It is accordingly contended that prescription of such qualification in the impugned advertisement requires interference of this Court. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the Parties and after going through the materials available on record, this Court finds that in the advertisement issued on 13.08.2021 under Annexure-4, the prescribed qualification for the post of Hindi Teacher is Bachelor’s degree from a recognized University with minimum 50% marks in aggregate with one of the following qualification i.e. Sastri from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishada, Puri and training qualification from any of the Institutions, which includes Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras. Petitioners in the present case though possess the qualification of Sastri (Hindi) from Orissa Rastrabhasa Parishada, Puri and the B.Ed. in Hindi from Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, Madras, but none of the Petitioners have got the required 50% marks in the Bachelor’s degree examination. 5.1. Since Petitioners in terms of the advertisement do not have the required qualification of Bachelor’s degree with minimum 50% of marks, placing reliance on the decision as Page 10 of 11 // 11 // cited (supra), this Court is not inclined to entertain the
Decision
prayer as made in the Writ Petition and accordingly dismiss the same. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack Dated the 2nd of November, 2023/Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 18-Dec-2023 15:17:31 Page 11 of 11