If a State wants to hire better qualified teachers, it can always do as it’s a State policy, observed the Supreme Court while dismissing a plea by a man challenging the Punjab government’s recruitment policy for arts and craft teachers in government schools.
The bench of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant refused to entertain the plea filed by Sandip Singh, who became ineligible for the said post in view of the amended rules notified by the Punjab Government.
The amended rules now prescribe that candidates should have graduated with at least 55% marks from a recognized university with Fine Arts as a subject studied for three years as per UGC guidelines.
Then they should have passed B Ed from a recognised university or institution with Fine Arts as one of the teaching subjects as per UGC guidelines.
“Let the state get more qualified and better people. It is in the benefit of students,” said Justice Chandrachud.
The petitioner submitted that he possessed qualification of Matric and 2 years’ diploma in Arts and Crafts and he was duly eligible under The Punjab State Education Class-III (School Cadre) Service Rules, 1978, which had been amended on July 8, 1995. Therefore, he had been rendered totally ineligible for recruitment to the post of Art and Crafts teachers. No time such has been given to him to acquire higher qualifications to become eligible under the impugned rules and, therefore, he became over age. The challenge was also made to the fact that the additional qualifications of passing of Punjab State Teachers’ Eligibility Test-2 has been wrongly made mandatory.
Also Read: Sharad Yadav Lutyens’ bungalow: Supreme Court asks Centre if Yadav can stay till July since he’s ill
The Punjab and Haryana High Court had noted,
“Admittedly, the petitioners are Matric pass and diploma holders and, thus, cannot claim to have any vested right as such for consideration on the ground of hardship which has been alleged to be caused. It is for the employer to see what are the requisite educational qualifications for the teachers that it wishes to employ and it is not for this Court as such, to substitute its opinion on the strength of the argument which is raised by counsel for the petitioners that hardship has been caused to them. Nothing as such could be pointed out which would go on to show that the prescription of higher qualifications, which are now in the form of Graduation with B Ed from a recognized university or institution and having two years’ diploma in the same along with the graduation degree can be said to be bad.”
The High Court said in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Devender Bhaskar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, 2022 (1) SCT 51 recently on 24.11.2021 which was pertaining to the Arts and Crafts courses equation which was issued by the Kurukshetra University has held that it is not for the Court to equalize diplomas/degrees. It was held that judicial review can neither expand the ambit of the prescribed qualifications nor decide the equivalence of the prescribed qualifications.
Also Read: Madras High Court disposes of PIL seeking cleaning of bed pond in Trichy village
The High Court had held,
“Once statutory Rules as such have been framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, this Court is of the opinion that the State Government is justified and had only upgraded the basic eligibility criteria as such by prescribing Graduation for filling up the posts of Art and Craft Teachers. No fault as such can be found in such action. It is settled principle that it is for the employer to choose the qualifications which are required for filling up the posts and it is not for the candidates as such to hold out what should be the requirement.”
The High Court further stated, “The argument that for Elementary Trained Teachers, the State as such had given a concession regarding the candidates who have done or are doing elementary training course with 10+2 qualification would be considered for employment as one time measure cannot be claimed as a matter of right as such.”