04:47
Unknown
SUPREME COURT K ORDER AA GAYA HAI
ABHEE SOCIAL MEDIA SE COPY PASTE.
BAAD MEIN AAPKI LINK BHEE DETE HAI
ye lo order aa gaya ......................
CA 4347-4375/14
1
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.6 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Nos.4347-4375 of 2014
STATE OF U.P & ORS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SHIV KUMAR PATHAK & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for intervention and office report)
WITH S.L.P.(C) No.62/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1672/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1674/2014
(With office report)
C.A. No.4376/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C)...CC No.10408/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11671/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11673/2014
(With office report)
Date : 17/12/2014 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Appellant(s) Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR
Mrs. Manju Aggarwal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Yeshraj Bundela, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv.
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2014.12.18
16:46:36 IST
Reason: Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Adv.
CA 4347-4375/14
2
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. B.P. Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Mr. Shakti Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Dr. Kailash Chand, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S.G.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Amritanshu, Adv.
Mr. Suryodaya Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv.
Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Kr. Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Singh, AOR
Mr. P.P. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, AOR
For NCTE Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
Ms. Geeta Singh, Adv.
Mr. Alok Gupta, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
CA 4347-4375/14
3
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. M. P. Jha, AOR
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashish Singh, Adv.
Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Manohar Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Swaroop, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Mr. Vipul Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
SLP 62/14 Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR
Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shreepal Singh, Adv.
Mr. V.D. Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Hearing resumed.
In course of hearing, we have thought it appropriate
to pass an interim order by which the vacancies can be filled
up and the academic climate in the State of Uttar Pradesh
shall not suffer an unnecessary winter.
CA 4347-4375/14
4
Be it noted, this Court on 25th March, 2014, had
passed the following order:
"Leave granted.
Hearing expedited.
By this interim order, we direct the State of
Uttar Pradesh to fill up the vacancies of
Assistant Teachers in the schools pursuant to
the advertisement issued on 30.11.2011 as per
the directions issued by the Division Bench of
Allahabad High Court in the case of Shiv Kumar
Pathak & Ors. [Special Appeal (Defective)
No.237 of 2013] and connected matters as
expeditiously as possible at any rate within 12
weeks' time from today.
Further, the State in the letter of appointment
that will be issued to the successful
candidates shall mention that their appointment
is subject to the result of the civil appeals
that are pending before this Court.
The appointee(s) shall not claim any equities
at the time of final disposal of the civil
appeals. All actions/proceedings of the State
Government will be subject to the final result
of these civil appeals."
Despite the aforesaid order, the State has not
carried out the appointment process. After hearing the
learned counsel for the parties at length on various
CA 4347-4375/14
5
occasions, we are inclined to modify the order passed on
25th March, 2014, and direct that the State Government shall
appoint the candidates, whose names have not been weeded out
in the malpractice and who have obtained/secured seventy
percent marks in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). The
candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled
Tribe/Other Backward Classes and the physically handicapped
persons, shall be appointed if they have obtained/secured
sixty-five percent marks. If there is any policy of the
State Government covering any other category for the purpose
of reservation, it may be given effect to with the same
percentage. It shall be mentioned in the appointment letter
that their appointment shall be subject to the result of
these appeals and they shall not claim any equity because of
the appointment, for it is issued on the basis of the
direction passed by this Court. The letters of appointment
shall be issued within a period of six weeks.
At this juncture, we must state that the
advertisement was issued to fill up 72,825 vacancies in the
post of Assistant Teachers, who have to impart education to
students of Classes I to V. We have been apprised by the
learned counsel for the respondents that there are three
lacs posts lying vacant as on today. In this context, we
must recapitulate the objects and reasons from the Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which
CA 4347-4375/14
6
read as follows:
"The crucial role of universal elementary
education for strengthening the social fabric
of democracy through provision of equal
opportunities to all has been accepted since
inception of our Republic. The Directive
Principles of State Policy enumerated in our
Constitution lays down that the State shall
provide free and compulsory education to all
children up to the age of fourteen years. Over
the years there has been significant spatial
and numerical expansion of elementary schools
in the country, yet the goal of universal
elementary education continues to elude us.
The number of children, particularly children
from disadvantaged groups and weaker sections,
who drop out of school before completing
elementary education, remains very large.
Moreover, the quality of learning achievement
is not always entirely satisfactory even in the
case of children who complete elementary
education.
2. Article 21A, as inserted by the
Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act,
2002, provides for free and compulsory
education of all children in the age group of
six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in
such manner as the State may, by law,
determine.
3. Consequently, the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008, is
CA 4347-4375/14
7
proposed to be enacted which seeks to provide,-
(a) that every child has a right to be provided
full time elementary education of satisfactory
and equitable quality in a formal school which
satisfied certain essential norms and
standards;
(b) 'compulsory education' casts an obligation
on the appropriate Government to provide and
ensure admission, attendance and completion of
elementary education;
(c) 'free education' means that no child, other
than a child who has been admitted by his or
her parents to a school which is not supported
by the appropriate Government, shall be liable
to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses
which may prevent him or her from pursuing and
completing elementary education;
(d) the duties and responsibilities of the
appropriate Governments, local authorities,
parents, schools and teachers in providing free
and compulsory education; and
(e) a system for protection of the right of
children and a decentralized grievance
redressal mechanism.
4. The proposed legislation is anchored in the
belief that the values of equality, social
justice and democracy and the creation of a
just and humane society can be achieved only
through provision of inclusive elementary
CA 4347-4375/14
8
education to all. Provision of free and
compulsory education of satisfactory quality to
children from disadvantaged and weaker sections
is, therefore, not merely the responsibility of
schools run or supported by the appropriate
Governments, but also of schools which are not
dependent on Government FUNDS."
Primary education can be equated to the primary
health of a child. When a child is educated, the Nation
marches towards civilization. No student can inculcate or
cultivate education without guidance. Definitely not a
child, who is supposed to get primary guidance from a
teacher, for him he is like a laser beam. The State, as the
guardian of all citizens and also with a further enhanced and
accentuated responsibilities for the children, has a
sacrosanct obligation to see that the children are educated.
Almost two thousand years back, Kautaliya had stated that the
parents who do not send their children to have the teachings,
deserves to be punished. Similar was the climate in England
almost seven centuries back. Thus, the significance of
education can be well recognized. In such a situation, we
cannot conceive that the posts would lie vacant, students go
untaught and the schools look like barren in a desert waiting
for an oasis. The teacher shall serve the purpose of oasis
in the field of education. Hence, the aforesaid directions.
CA 4347-4375/14
9
The competent authority shall file a compliance
report, failing which they shall face the consequences as the
law provides and the law does not countenance disobedience of
the law and orders of the court.
Let the matter be listed on 25th February, 2015, for
further hearing.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
ABHEE SOCIAL MEDIA SE COPY PASTE.
BAAD MEIN AAPKI LINK BHEE DETE HAI
ye lo order aa gaya ......................
CA 4347-4375/14
1
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.6 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Nos.4347-4375 of 2014
STATE OF U.P & ORS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SHIV KUMAR PATHAK & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for intervention and office report)
WITH S.L.P.(C) No.62/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1672/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.1674/2014
(With office report)
C.A. No.4376/2014
(With interim relief and office report)
S.L.P.(C)...CC No.10408/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11671/2014
(With office report)
S.L.P.(C) No.11673/2014
(With office report)
Date : 17/12/2014 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Appellant(s) Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satya Mitra Garg, AOR
Mrs. Manju Aggarwal Singh, Adv.
Mr. Yeshraj Bundela, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv.
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2014.12.18
16:46:36 IST
Reason: Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Adv.
CA 4347-4375/14
2
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. B.P. Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Mr. Shakti Singh Dhakray, Adv.
Dr. Kailash Chand, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, S.G.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Amritanshu, Adv.
Mr. Suryodaya Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv.
Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Kr. Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Singh, AOR
Mr. P.P. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, AOR
For NCTE Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
Ms. Geeta Singh, Adv.
Mr. Alok Gupta, AOR
Mr. Garvesh Kabra, AOR
CA 4347-4375/14
3
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. M. P. Jha, AOR
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashish Singh, Adv.
Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Manohar Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Swaroop, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Mr. Vipul Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
SLP 62/14 Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR
Mr. Vivek Vishnoi, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shreepal Singh, Adv.
Mr. V.D. Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Hearing resumed.
In course of hearing, we have thought it appropriate
to pass an interim order by which the vacancies can be filled
up and the academic climate in the State of Uttar Pradesh
shall not suffer an unnecessary winter.
CA 4347-4375/14
4
Be it noted, this Court on 25th March, 2014, had
passed the following order:
"Leave granted.
Hearing expedited.
By this interim order, we direct the State of
Uttar Pradesh to fill up the vacancies of
Assistant Teachers in the schools pursuant to
the advertisement issued on 30.11.2011 as per
the directions issued by the Division Bench of
Allahabad High Court in the case of Shiv Kumar
Pathak & Ors. [Special Appeal (Defective)
No.237 of 2013] and connected matters as
expeditiously as possible at any rate within 12
weeks' time from today.
Further, the State in the letter of appointment
that will be issued to the successful
candidates shall mention that their appointment
is subject to the result of the civil appeals
that are pending before this Court.
The appointee(s) shall not claim any equities
at the time of final disposal of the civil
appeals. All actions/proceedings of the State
Government will be subject to the final result
of these civil appeals."
Despite the aforesaid order, the State has not
carried out the appointment process. After hearing the
learned counsel for the parties at length on various
CA 4347-4375/14
5
occasions, we are inclined to modify the order passed on
25th March, 2014, and direct that the State Government shall
appoint the candidates, whose names have not been weeded out
in the malpractice and who have obtained/secured seventy
percent marks in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). The
candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled
Tribe/Other Backward Classes and the physically handicapped
persons, shall be appointed if they have obtained/secured
sixty-five percent marks. If there is any policy of the
State Government covering any other category for the purpose
of reservation, it may be given effect to with the same
percentage. It shall be mentioned in the appointment letter
that their appointment shall be subject to the result of
these appeals and they shall not claim any equity because of
the appointment, for it is issued on the basis of the
direction passed by this Court. The letters of appointment
shall be issued within a period of six weeks.
At this juncture, we must state that the
advertisement was issued to fill up 72,825 vacancies in the
post of Assistant Teachers, who have to impart education to
students of Classes I to V. We have been apprised by the
learned counsel for the respondents that there are three
lacs posts lying vacant as on today. In this context, we
must recapitulate the objects and reasons from the Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which
CA 4347-4375/14
6
read as follows:
"The crucial role of universal elementary
education for strengthening the social fabric
of democracy through provision of equal
opportunities to all has been accepted since
inception of our Republic. The Directive
Principles of State Policy enumerated in our
Constitution lays down that the State shall
provide free and compulsory education to all
children up to the age of fourteen years. Over
the years there has been significant spatial
and numerical expansion of elementary schools
in the country, yet the goal of universal
elementary education continues to elude us.
The number of children, particularly children
from disadvantaged groups and weaker sections,
who drop out of school before completing
elementary education, remains very large.
Moreover, the quality of learning achievement
is not always entirely satisfactory even in the
case of children who complete elementary
education.
2. Article 21A, as inserted by the
Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act,
2002, provides for free and compulsory
education of all children in the age group of
six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in
such manner as the State may, by law,
determine.
3. Consequently, the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008, is
CA 4347-4375/14
7
proposed to be enacted which seeks to provide,-
(a) that every child has a right to be provided
full time elementary education of satisfactory
and equitable quality in a formal school which
satisfied certain essential norms and
standards;
(b) 'compulsory education' casts an obligation
on the appropriate Government to provide and
ensure admission, attendance and completion of
elementary education;
(c) 'free education' means that no child, other
than a child who has been admitted by his or
her parents to a school which is not supported
by the appropriate Government, shall be liable
to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses
which may prevent him or her from pursuing and
completing elementary education;
(d) the duties and responsibilities of the
appropriate Governments, local authorities,
parents, schools and teachers in providing free
and compulsory education; and
(e) a system for protection of the right of
children and a decentralized grievance
redressal mechanism.
4. The proposed legislation is anchored in the
belief that the values of equality, social
justice and democracy and the creation of a
just and humane society can be achieved only
through provision of inclusive elementary
CA 4347-4375/14
8
education to all. Provision of free and
compulsory education of satisfactory quality to
children from disadvantaged and weaker sections
is, therefore, not merely the responsibility of
schools run or supported by the appropriate
Governments, but also of schools which are not
dependent on Government FUNDS."
Primary education can be equated to the primary
health of a child. When a child is educated, the Nation
marches towards civilization. No student can inculcate or
cultivate education without guidance. Definitely not a
child, who is supposed to get primary guidance from a
teacher, for him he is like a laser beam. The State, as the
guardian of all citizens and also with a further enhanced and
accentuated responsibilities for the children, has a
sacrosanct obligation to see that the children are educated.
Almost two thousand years back, Kautaliya had stated that the
parents who do not send their children to have the teachings,
deserves to be punished. Similar was the climate in England
almost seven centuries back. Thus, the significance of
education can be well recognized. In such a situation, we
cannot conceive that the posts would lie vacant, students go
untaught and the schools look like barren in a desert waiting
for an oasis. The teacher shall serve the purpose of oasis
in the field of education. Hence, the aforesaid directions.
CA 4347-4375/14
9
The competent authority shall file a compliance
report, failing which they shall face the consequences as the
law provides and the law does not countenance disobedience of
the law and orders of the court.
Let the matter be listed on 25th February, 2015, for
further hearing.
(Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master
Posted in: Employment News
0 comments:
Post a Comment