30 Aug 2023 5:56 AM GMT
In a temporary relief to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) degree holders in Chhattisgarh, the Supreme Court recently stayed an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court which excluded B.Ed candidates from the recruitment process for Assistant Teachers.The High Court had passed the order relying on the recent Supreme Court judgment in Devesh Sharma v. Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 633 which held...
In a temporary relief to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) degree holders in Chhattisgarh, the Supreme Court recently stayed an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court which excluded B.Ed candidates from the recruitment process for Assistant Teachers.
The High Court had passed the order relying on the recent Supreme Court judgment in Devesh Sharma v. Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 633 which held that B.Ed candidates are not eligible to be appointed as Primary School Teachers as the qualification prescribed for the said post is diploma in elementary education (D.El.Ed.)
The petitioners approached the Supreme Court contending that the High Court misconstrued the Devesh Sharma judgment. The petitioners further contended that the High Court erred in applying the Devesh Sharma judgment with retrospective effect, without taking into consideration the Doctrine of Prospective Over-ruling.
In the instant case, the advertisement to fill up the posts of 6285 Assistant Teacher was issued on May 4, 2023. The exam was conducted on June 10, 2023 and the results were declared on July 2, 2023 and the petitioners were included in the list of successful candidates. The Supreme Court's judgment in Devesh Sharma was delivered on August 11, 2023. Following that, few D.Ed candidates filed the writ petition in the High Court seeking to exclude B.Ed candidates. The High Court passed an interim order observing that further recruitment process with regard to the candidates having B.Ed. qualification for the post of Assistant Teachers shall be kept in abeyance with immediate effect.
Challenging the High Court order, the petition also cited the case of Assam Public Service Commission v Pranjal Kumar (2020) 20 SCC 680 wherein it was held that the norms existing on the date when the process of selection begins, will control the selection and the alteration to the norms would not affect the ongoing process unless the new rules are to be given retrospective effect.
Based on these arguments, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and PK Mishra ordered:
“In the meantime, taking into consideration that the recruitment process which was in progress, is now interrupted by the ad- interim order dated 21.08.2023 and the aspect ultimately to be considered by the High Court is with regard to the manner in which the judgment in C.A. No. 5068 of 2023 passed by this Court is to be construed, at this stage interrupting the recruitment process would not be justified. Therefore, to the said extent, we hereby stay the order dated 21. 08.2023 passed by the High Court and clarify that the recruitment process, which was in progress prior to the date of the said interim order passed by the High Court, shall continue and the appointments, if any, made thereunder will however remain subject to result of the consideration to be made by the High Court in W.P.S No. 5788 of 2023. The selected candidates shall be informed of the same by the Appointing Authority”.
The petitioners were represented by Mr. Ravindra Shrivastava, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Adv. Naushina Ali, Adv. Mr. Aniket Singh Das, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sukriti Chauhan, Adv. Dewangana Singh, Adv. Sanya Shukla, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Shrivastava, AOR Mr. Sanjay Hegde, Sr. Adv. Dr. Manoj Gorkela, Adv. Ms. Sitwat Nabi, Adv. Ms. Indira Goswami, Adv. Mr. Varun Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kushwaha, Adv. Mr. Adutiya Veer, Adv. Ms. Raina Anand, Adv. Mr. Ankit Srivastava, Adv.M/S. Gorkela Law Office, AOR
Case Title: HARISHANKAR & ANR v. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS., SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No. 35325/2023
Click Here To Read/Download Order