N. Uma Sundari and Jainul Zulaiga vs The State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Honourable Mr. Justice Vinod K. Sharma

The Petitioner in W.P(MD) No. 11381 of 2006 has challenged the Government order laying down the eligibility condition for appointment to B.

Ed course, whereas, the Petitioner in W.P(MD) No. 11378 of 2006 has challenged the consequential order arising out of the Government order,

in not allowing the Petitioner to sit in the B. Ed examination.

Both the Writ Petitions are being disposed of by common order, as common

The Petitioners in both these Writ Petitions have obtained Bachelor''s Degree question of law, and facts arise for consideration. from a

recognized University. The Petitioners, had, joined graduation course by not following the regular stream of study i.e., 10+2+3.

The eligibility criteria as per the statutory provisions, and the guidelines laid down by the National Council for Teachers Education, for admission

to B. Ed Course is graduation with 45% marks.

The Government of Tamil Nadu issued the impugned Government Order, laying down that the students who have passed the graduation

examination without completing 10+2+3 system will not be eligible for B. Ed examination. Nothing has been disclosed in the Government Order as

to under what authority of law, the said Government Order, is issued to regulate the admission of candidates in different Universities, which are

regulated by Respondent No. 3, and the University Act and the Statutory rules, framed therein.

However, there is no necessity to deliberate on this matter any further, as both the Writ Petitions deserves to be allowed, being fully covered by

the decision of the Honourable Division Bench of this Court in W.A. (MD) 492 of 2007, decided on 11.02.2008(V. Vijayalakshmi. v. The

Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai -600 006 and Ors. wherein, the Honourable Division Bench of this Court was pleased to lay down as

under:

On the above said contention, this Court posed a question to the Learned Counsel appearing for the second Respondent University to point out

any such requisition is available in the University to say that the candidates who under went 10+2+3 paternal one are eligible to join B. Ed Course,

for which he is unable to point out any such Regulation. However, he submitted that the guidelines stated to have been issued by the Director of

Collegiate Education stipulate that the candidates who haved one their degree course under 10+2+3 paternal one are eligible to join the B. Ed

Course.

Learned Counsel appearing for the 3rd Respondent College submitted that in identical cases, where the candidates studied degree through

correspondence course were permitted to pursue B. Ed Course, this Court passed orders directing the Universities and the Colleges to declare

their results as no valid Regulations preventing such persons are found mentioned in the University Regulations or Statutes and hence the relief

sought for by the appellant can be granted.

Inspite of the fact that these correspondent University has not produced any Regulation, they justified their stand. Even the guidelines stated to

have been produced for our consideration. In any event, once a particular degree has been introduced/offered by the Universities, it is for the

authorities to prescribe guidelines. As mentioned above, no such guidelines/Regulations formulated by the second Respondent University making

the candidates like the Appellant ineligible to pursue B. Ed course. In view of the above said fact, this Court has no option except to grant there lief

sought for by the appellant. Moreover, no valid reason is mentioned by the learned single Judge for dismissing the writ petition.

For the above said reasons, the Writ Appeal is allowed setting aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The second Respondent

University is directed to declare the results of the appellant with in a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No

costs. Connected M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2007 is closed.

There for, both the Writ Petitions are allowed. The Respondents are directed to declare the result of the Petitioners, and issue necessary

certificates etc to the Petitioner, without any further delay.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

No costs.