HC rejects notification of HPSSC for selection JBTs

In the matter of selection to the posts of Junior Basic Teachers, Himachal Pradesh High court rejected today notifications of  Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission (“HPSSC”) issued Dec, 19 2018 terming it bad in law.

In a 38 paged verdict passed by the division bench of Justice Tralok Singh Chauhan and Justice Satyan Vaidaya issued here today the court said that advertisement inviting applications from eligible JBT candidate was bad in law should be issued  in the amended form.
Court held that HPSSC did not consider the notification issued by NCTE which prescribed graduation with B.Ed. as one of the essential qualifications for JBT  prior to issuing an advertisement in this regard.

The court said that an advertisement made by the HPSSC itself was
deficient in prescription of essential qualification mandated under law
and hence would deem to include such lawful prescription.

Rejecting the counter petitions filed by some of the petitioner( affected by the NCTC notification) in the matter court said that it is clear from above noted exposition of law  that the attempt of petitioners(2nd set of petitions) to challenge the prescription made by NCTE (vide notification 28.6.2018) is a futile exercise.     
Such petitions, in the facts and circumstances of the case,
could not be heard to have acquired any vested right on the basis of
advertisement issued by HPSSC, moroever they do not have any right to assail the same. 
Another ground raised in 2nd set of petitions that pupils of Classes I-V require special kind of treatment and appropriate teaching methods were taught only to the persons having undergone two years specialized basic course in education techniques provided to JBT trained candiate vis a vis to the candidates undergone B.Ed. course.
This contention, in our considered view, could not be a subject of judicial review for the reason that the Central Government in its wisdom has constituted a body of experts for the specific purpose.
” The  court could not sit in judicial review over the decision of expert body, especially in absence of any material to prove arbitrariness in making of such decision.” 
” The education techniques have to keep pace with ever evolving society. Like all other progressive fields, the field of education could not remain static. ” 
Court quoting a paper published by the NCTE in 2009 titled “National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education” said that it clearly revealed that the need for the up-gradation of teaching procedure was on higher agenda of on cerned authorities. 
The court also held that it could not be said that the qualification prescribed by NCTE for appointment of Teachers is a mindless exercise. 
Bench said that nothing has been placed before court to suggest even remotely that NCTE has either over-stepped its jurisdiction or has made decisions which are not in the public interest.
The petitioner alleged that NCTC violatE Sub-sec 2 of Sec 23 of RTE Actthe court said that to canvass this proposition, it has been argued that theCentral Government or NCTE were precluded from the exercising the
jurisdiction under the above said provision without request being made
by the concerned State Government in that behalf. 
This argument deserves to be rejected for the reason that the NCTE had exercised the power under sub-sec one of sec 23 of the RTE Act for prescribing qualification for teachers and sub-Sec 2 of Sec  23 was thus inapplicable. 

Petitioner further argued that since  prescription made NCTC amounted to relaxation of qualification, therefore, exercise of power by NCTE was to be construed under Sec 2 of Sec 23 of RTE Act. 
This assertion also deserves to be rejected. There are no plausible or
reasonable grounds to hold that mere enhancement in the field of
qualified candidates amount to relaxation in qualification, rather in
our considered view, it amounts to enhancing the qualification for JBT
with the purpose to boost the efficiency. 
For the same reasons as detailed above, we do not find any substance in the contention that inclusion of category prescribed by the Notification dated 28.06.2018 makes ineligible persons eligible.
 In view of the above discussion it is held that the Notification
dated 28.06.2018 issued by NCTE is binding on Elementary Education
Department of the Government of Himachal Pradesh as also the
HPSSC.
 Hence, the recruitment process initiated by the HPSSC through
advertisement dated DEC 19, 2018 for the post of JBTs without inclusion
of nNotification issued by NCTE is bad in law being violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 
The HPSSC is directed to complete the recruitment process for
the post of JBTs initiated in pursuance to advertisement  by considering the candidates with qualifications prescribed by the NCTE on Jun  28, 2018 eligible in addition to the already eligible candidates. 
Court directed the elementary education department is also directed to amend 2017 rules accordingly to avoid any misgiving in future.