AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Bharuka.J
Rule.
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Srinivasa Reddy, learned Additional Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents. The Statement of Objections has been filed.
As stated in the Writ Petitions, the 1st petitioner is a registered Society. Its object is to look after the welfare of the Primary School Teachers belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes community. Petitioner No. 2 is one of its members. It is the common case of the contesting parties that large number of persons having no qualification of Teachers Training course had been appointed as Teachers with a condition that subsequently they will undergo a special training and acquire the requisite qualification in this -regard. Till 1986-87 the Government was conducting the course known as Correspondence-cum-Vocational Course for training of such teachers but the same has been abandoned since 1986-87. Now for training the untrained in-service Teachers who are mostly of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, as per the Government Order No. ED 37 MPE 93 dated 10.1.1994, the second respondent prepared the course materials in consultation with the Chairman of the Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board (in short, ''the Board''). Thereafter the training was started on 4.7.1994. The total period of the training (direct contact) was six weeks. It was conducted during summer and mid-term vacations. The petitioners do not dispute the conduct of the said training; but, their grievance is that though they have been given only six weeks training, they are being forced to undertake the regular Teachers Training Examination (Higher) (for short, TCH), which requires extensive training of two years in any Government or non-Government Institution, which is not only contrary to the statutory provisions but is also arbitrary and impermissible in law.
The TCH examination is held by the Board pursuant to the powers conferred upon it u/s 15 of the Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board Act, 1966 read with Regulations as contained in Chapter VII of the Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board, First Regulations, 1966 (in short, ''the Act'' and ''Regulations'' hereinafter).
Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 15 which are relevant for the present purposes are to the following effect:
"Section 15: Subject to the provisions of this Act, the powers and duties of the Board shall be as follows namely -
(a) to hold, _
(i) Karnataka Secondary School Leaving Certificate Examination;
(ii) the Teachers Certificate Examination (Higher);
(iii) the Teachers Certificate Examination (Lower);
(iv) any other examination which the State Government may from time to time by notification specify;
(b) to make regulations for all or any of the matters specified in Section 26."
Regulation 57(A) which provides the eligibility for appearing at the TCH Examination reads as under:
"Training Certificate (Higher) -
(i) Candidates who have passed Karnataka SSLC Examination or any examination considered equivalent to the Karnataka SSLC Examination, will be eligible for admission to the Examination.
(ii) They should have undergone training for two academic years in a Government/non-Government Training institution recognised by the Department for imparting training in the courses of studies prescribed for this Examination."
On a bare reading of the Regulation 57(A)(ii) it is amply clear that for undertaking the TCH Examination the candidate must have undergone training for two academic years in an institution of the prescribed description. But, in the present case, admittedly the members of the first petitioner have not undergone any such training. Therefore ex-facie they are ineligible for appearing at the TCH Examination held by the Board. That being the position the respondents have no authority either to compel the untrained teachers represented by the first petitioner to act contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules or to force the Board to permit such ineiligible candidates to appear at its regularly held TCH Examinations. In this view of the matter, the grievance raised by the petitioners seems to be valid. Therefore, the respondents are restrained from compelling the untrained in-service teachers to under take the regular TCH examinations held by the Board.
Anyhow, since under the terms and conditions of their service, the untrained teachers are liable to take a Training Examination, the Government, if so advised, in consultation with the Board may direct for holding a special examination in terms of Section 15(a)(iv) befitting the service conditions of such teachers. If any such Examination is held by the Board, the members of the petitioner-Society will be bound to appear at such Examination as per the directions of the Government.
Subject to the said discussions and directions, Writ Petitions are allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs.