Deepa vs State of Punjab and another

Petitioner has invoked the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction

of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, assailing

the action of the respondent - School Education Department, State of

Punjab, in having denied to her appointment to the post of Hindi

Mistress.

Facts in brief may be noticed.

The Department of School Education, State of Punjab,

issued advertisement dated 23.09.2009 (Annexure P-1), inviting

applications for recruitment to various posts including 713 posts of

Hindi Masters/Mistress. The minimum academic and professional

qualification prescribed for the post of Hindi Masters/Mistress was as

follows:-

"Three years graduation degree from recognized University with Hindi as subject with all the three years of graduation and B.Ed. with Hindi of Teaching."

The selection procedure was also disclosed in the

advertisement itself and as per which, the recruitment was to be

made on the basis of merit by calculating the percentage of marks

obtained in the prescribed basic and professional qualification as

also higher qualifications (if any) and teaching experience, the

certificate of which, was to be counter signed by the concerned

District Education Officer (S.E.) or by the Competent Authority. For

the Masters Cadre, six marks were to be granted to a candidate

possessing higher qualifications. As regards teaching experience, is

concerned, the specific recital in the advertisement was to the

following effect:-

"Maximum marks-10, are admissible by calculating one mark for each year experience after obtaining the basic qualification. No mark will be given for the experience lesser than one year."

Petitioner who belongs to the General category and

possesses the qualifications of B.A., M.A. and B.Ed., applied for the

post of Hindi Mistress. Being eligible for the post, application of the

petitioner was duly processed and in the combined provisional merit

list of Masters/Mistress (Hindi) at Annexure P-4, the petitioner was

assigned a total of 64.2 marks (Annexure P-4). The break up of the

marks, which was also indicated in such provisional list, clearly

indicates that the petitioner had been granted six marks for

possessing higher qualification of M.A. and ten marks towards

teaching experience.

The precise grievance raised in the petition is that the last

selected and appointed candidate to the post of Hindi

Masters/Mistress in the General Category, has secured 62.42 marks,

whereas, the petitioner having secured a higher merit position i.e.

64.2, has been denied appointment. It is contended that such action

is per se arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the

Constitution of India.

During the course of arguments, it has been conceded by

counsel representing the petitioner that the petitioner passed the B.A.

qualification in 1997 and acquired the B.Ed. qualification in the year

2009. The teaching experience possessed by the petitioner is

reflected in terms of a certificate dated 26.11.2009 at Annexure P-3

and which, apparently reflects that the petitioner has taught in

Dayanand Public Senior Secondary School, Naya Nangal, since

01.08.1998. Such experience certificate does not reflect any teaching

experience after the petitioner had acquired B.Ed. qualification in the

year 2009.

Learned counsel representing the petitioner would

vehemently contend that the petitioner had acquired the Nursery

Teacher Training Course (two years course) in the year 1994 and as

such, the teaching experience possessed by the petitioner after

acquiring such Nursery Teacher Training Course, would have to be

reckoned for assigning weightage of one year for each completed

year of teaching experience and as such, the grant of weightage of 10

marks towards teaching experience, while calculating the final merit

of the petitioner as 64.2 marks, was perfectly valid. It is further urged

that under the statutory rules governing the service conditions of the

post of Hindi Masters/Mistress i.e. Punjab State Education Class-III

(School Cadre) Service Rules 1978 (as amended from time to time),

there is no provision as regards weightage towards experience, to be

granted only after acquiring of the qualification of B.A./B.Ed.

On behalf of the State, the action of denying to the

petitioner, appointment to the post in question is justified on the basis

that after the provisional merit list had been prepared, a discrepancy

that had crept in, was made good and the ten marks awarded towards

teaching experience to the petitioner, were deleted. As per State

counsel, in the revised final merit list, the petitioner has secured

54.199 marks.

Counsel for the parties have been heard.

There can be no dispute that selection and appointment to

the post of Hindi Masters/Mistress would have to be governed strictly

as per terms and conditions contained in the advertisement dated

23.09.2009 (Annexure P-1) and in response to which, the petitioner

had submitted her application and participated in the process of

selection. The minimum/basic academic and professional

qualifications for the post of Hindi Masters/Mistress were a three

years Graduation Degree with Hindi as a subject, in all the three

years of Graduation and B.Ed. with Hindi of teaching. The marks

admissible towards experience were by calculating one mark for

each year experience "after" obtaining the basic qualification.

What clearly emerges from the advertisement is that a

candidate who possesses teaching experience after possessing the

basic/minimum qualifications i.e. B.A. And B.Ed., would be granted

one mark for each completed year of experience. The conceded

position of fact is that after the year 2009 i.e. when she acquired the

basic qualification, petitioner does not possess any teaching

experience. Under such circumstances, the grant of ten marks

towards teaching experience to the petitioner and as reflected in the

provisional merit list, was an error. It was always open for the

respondent-authorities to have corrected such error. The same in fact

has been done and ten marks from the total merit, has been deducted

and thereby reducing the petitioner''s merit position to 54.199 marks.

The last selected candidate in the General category has secured

62.42 marks. Petitioner as such, has rightfully been denied

appointment to the post of Hindi Mistress.

The contention raised by counsel as regards counting of

teaching experience acquired after Nursery Teacher Training

Course, acquired in 1994, is wholly misconceived. The grant of

weightage towards experience has to be governed in terms of the

specific conditions stipulated in the advertisement. Accepting the

arguments raised on behalf of the petitioner would amount to grant of

weightage towards teaching experience, which is alien to the

advertisement. That apart, it would be presumed that the petitioner

had read each and every term and condition of the advertisement

that was issued on 23.09.2009 (Annexure P-1). It is not the case of the

petitioner that any challenge had been laid to the advertisement at

the very threshold. Petitioner had participated in the selection

process by accepting the terms and conditions contained in the

advertisement. Petitioner cannot be now permitted to turn around

and contend that experience after acquiring the Nursery Teacher

Training Course as well, has to be taken into reckoning for grant of

weightage.

Even as regards the statutory rules governing service are

concerned, the same are completely silent insofar as grant of

weightage towards experience is concerned. As regards the

essential/minimum qualifications are concerned, the advertisement

was para materia and in line with the qualifications prescribed under

the statutory rules. Under such circumstances, it was open for the

respondent-authorities to have made a stipulation for grant of

weightage towards teaching experience. Such a stipulation would not

be construed to be operating in contradiction to the statutory rules.

In the totality of circumstances, no exception can be taken

to the action of the respondent in having denied to the petitioner, the

weightage towards teaching experience that she had acquired after

possessing Nursery Teacher Training Course. Since concededly after

acquiring the basic qualifications of B.A./B.Ed., in the year 2009,

petitioner does not possess any teaching experience, ten marks

assigned towards weightage of experience in the provisional merit

list, have been rightfully deducted.

On a pointed query having been put, counsel admits that

there is no other candidate who has been granted weightage towards

teaching experience prior to possessing the basic essential

qualifications.

For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the

petition and the same is dismissed.