Htet /ctet 2013 court case

Application filed by Pawan Chamarkheda (PAS Hisar
President) & others in CTET/HTET-2013 matter, prayed that
the applicants be ordered to be added as respondents to the
present writ petition,which was allowed by HC
---------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CIVIL MISC. NO. 14531 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL WRIT PETITION. NO. 346 OF 2013
Antim Kumari Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others Respondent
Application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for impleadment of the present
applicants as respondent to the present CWP as the presence
of the applicants will enable the Hon’ble Court to effectually
and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions
involved in the Civil Writ Pettition.
Respectfully showeth:-
1. That the petitioner has filed the present petition under
Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a
writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Certiorari
quashing impugned advertisement dated 08.11.2012
(Annexure P-3) vide which person like petitioner having
Central Teacher Eligibility Certificate is found ineligible for the
post of Primary Teacher (PRT) (Group-C), being illegal null
and void inter-alia contending that the respondent no. 1 has
not conducted HTET/STET in the year 2012 and on this
ground has sought the above mentioned different reliefs.
2. That the present applicants are the fully eligible candidates
on the cut-off date of the Advertisement i.e 8 December 2012
and whose interviews have also been conducted by the
Respondent No. 3 on different dates in the month of July and
August 2013. That the present applicants wants to bring to
the notice of the Hon’ble Court the fact that the State of
Haryana started conducted the Haryana Teachers Eligibility
Test(HTET)/ State Teachers Eligibility Test(STET) in the year
2008. Since 2008, the State of Haryana has conducted the test
as many as five times in the years 2008, 2009(Two times),
2011 and in 2013. That the advertisement was published in
the year 2012 and the candidates who were eligible on the
cut-off date were to be interviewed by the respondent No. 3
after scrutiny of their forms. That the persons who availed the
opportunity of appearing in the HTET/STET in any of the
exams held 2008 onwards and declared fail cannot be said to
be aggrieved for not conducting the HTET/STET by the State
of Haryana in the year 2012. But the present petitioner on the
other hand has availed many opportunities and cannot be said
to be aggrieved by the non conducting of the HSET/STET by
the State of Haryana in 2012. Further the qualifications as
mentioned in the Advertisement are to be adhered to in letter
and spirit. The qualification of having qualified HTET/STET
cannot be diluted and the persons having qualified the CTET
cannot be said to be eligible for the post of Primary teacher.
Therefore the candidature of the petitioner has rightly been
rejected by the respondent no. 3 in the present petition.
Further a similar issue has also been decided by the Hon’ble
High court in CWP. No. 4486 of 2013 vide judgment dated
01.03.2013 and the same is annexed as Annexure R6/1. The
operative part of the judgment is reproduced here for the kind
perusal of this court:-
“the contention of the counsel for the petitioners that clause 4
(iii) of the advertisement dated 13.10.2011 (Annexure P-16),
which prescribes candidates to be eligible for appointment to
the post of ETT teacher should have cleared Punjab State
Teachers Eligibility test of Punjab Government, to be violative
of the guidelines laid down by the NCTE dated 11.02.2011
(Annexure P-26) for conducting the Teachers Eligibility Test,
cannot be accepted . Guidelines 10 of the same reads as
follows:-
“10.(a) TET conducted by the central government shall apply
to all schools referred to in sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of
section 2 of the RTE Act.
(b) TET conducted by a state government/UT with legislature
shall apply to;
(i) a school of the state government/UT with legislature and
local authority referred to in sub-clause (i) of clause (n) of
section 2 of the RTE Act; and
(ii) a school referred to in sub-clause(ii) of clause (n) of
section 2 of the RTE Act in that state/UT.
A school at (i) and (ii) may also consider eligibility of a
candidate who has obtained TET certificate awarded by
another State/UT with legislature. In case a State
government/UT with legislature decides not to conduct a TET,
a school at (i) and (ii) in that State/UT would consider the TET
conducted by the central government.
A school referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clause (n) of section
2 of the RTE ACT may exercise the option of considering either
the TET conducted by the central Government or the TET
conducted by the State Government/UT with legislature.”
A perusal of the above would show that it has been left to the
discretion of the concerned central/state/UT government(s)
with legislature to consider the eligibility of the candidates
who have obtained TET certificate awarded by another
Central/State/UT Government(s) with legislature. The
prescription, therefore, in the advertisement that the candidate
should have cleared the Punjab State Teachers Eligibility Test
of Punjab Government, cannot be said to be illegal which
would call for this court to strike down the same. State of
Punjab has rightly exercised its power for restricting the
eligibility of the candidates for appointment to the post of ETT
teachers to candidates who have cleared the Teachers
Eligibility Test held by the Punjab Government. Since the
petitioners do not fulfill the requirement of the advertisement,
their candidature has rightly been rejected by the
respondents.”
3. That the present applicants also wants to state that the
Hon’ble Court has granted stay on the declaration of result by
way of interim order dated 27.08.2013. That the applicants
wants to bring to the notice of this Hon’ble Court that the
applicants are aggrieved of the stay order as it will further
delay the recruitment process and whole of the processs
would come to a stand-still. Further the process will linger on
for months together.
4. That it is therefore expedient in the ends of justice and for
the proper adjudication of the case that the present applicants
be made party to the Civil Writ Petition and be impleaded as
Respondents.
PRAYER
It is most respectfully prayed that the applicants be ordered to
be added as respondents to the present writ petition.
Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit may
also be granted.
It is prayed accordingly.
Place: Chandigarh Applicants
Dated: 25.09.2013