AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D. Murugesan, J.—The Petitioner has filed this writ petition through her father as the Petitioner is minor challenging the selection of candidates made by the 1st Respondent for admission to First year Teacher Training Course in the 2nd Respondent''s institution and for a consequential direction to admit the Petitioner for the said course. The Petitioner has studied Tamil, English, Mathematics, Science and Social Science in Tamil medium in 10th standard. After completion of 10th standard, the Petitioner has studied +1 and +2 wherein the Petitioner has secured 906/1200 marks. The Petitioner has studied Urdu as a language in +1 and +2. Pursuant to the notification in Tamil daily dated 17.8.2000, calling for admission to first year Teacher Training course issued by the 1st Respondent, the Petitioner applied for admission on 26.8.2000 well before the last date namely 31.8.2000. When the results of the candidates were published, on 9.11.2000 for the 2nd Respondent''s institution, the Petitioner''s name was not included in the list of candidates selected. On the other hand, candidates with lesser marks than the Petitioner were selected. Therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the writ petition.
When this matter was taken up for hearing, Mr. M. Rathinam, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the application of the Petitioner was not considered as the Petitioner has not studied Urdu language in Xth standard examination which is a condition precedent for the eligibility of a candidate to be considered for admission. Therefore, only the Petitioner''s application was rejected. In the absence of the Petitioner studied Urdu language in 10th standard, the Petitioner cannot said to have complied with the guidelines prescribed for admission to Teacher Training Course and, therefore, the Petitioner cannot either challenge the selection made on the basis of the guidelines or seek for a direction for admission contrary to the guidelines.
3.I have considered the submission. In a similar circumstances, I had an occasion to consider the notification and the guidelines prescribing the eligibility criteria for admission to the Teacher Training Course and also the clauses stipulated in the application form. Ultimately, I have held that the condition to study Urdu language in 10th standard cannot be insisted in view of the fact that neither in the guidelines nor in the notification, the said condition has been stipulated as one of the condition prescribed for making an application for admission.
In this connection, it is to be noted that the 1st Respondent has issued notification and guidelines for the candidates applying for Teacher Training Course for the year 2000-2001. Clause 1 of the notification relates to Educational Qualification which could be conveniently extracted as follows:
candidate should have passed the Higher Secondary Course with 50% marks. These marks may be inclusive of the first improvement. It is enough if the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes candidates have passed in the Higher Secondary Examinations.
Clause 4(e) of the said notification stipulates the selection procedure which could be conveniently extracted as follows:
Leaving out the special quota candidates for the other seats will be selected based on communal rotation. The selection will be based on the marks obtained in the Higher Secondary Examination (inclusive of the first improvement scheme) and will be purely on merit basis.
In both the clauses, the minimum eligibility criteria for applying to the Teacher Training Course is a pass in Higher Secondary Examinations, while interpreting Clause 9 of the application form, the guidelines, prescribed by the Government with regard to the eligibility of the candidates for admission to the Teacher Education Course are also to be taken into consideration. Clause 9 of the application form stipulates as follows" -"(a) Language studied in part I or Part II in X standard (b) Language studied in part I Hr. Section Course (candidate should have studied the language upto XII standard for which medium he/she applied) A clear reading of the above clauses, would indicate that in so far as the Clause 9(a) is concerned, all that has been instructed is that, the candidate should have studied language in part I or part II in X standard and as far as Clause 9(b) is concerned, the candidates are directed to furnish the language studied in part I Hr. Section Course. Only in the said Clause 9(b), it has been stated that candidates should have studied the language upto XII standard for which medium he/she applied. Therefore, it is clear the applicant should have studied the language in +1 and +2 for which medium she applies as a condition for applying for admission to Teacher Training Course. Admittedly, the Petitioner has studied Urdu language in +1 and +2 which has not been disputed by the learned Additional Government Pleader. However, the contention of the learned Additional Government Pleader is that the Petitioner ought to have studied the Urdu language in X standard also. Since the Petitioner did not study Urdu language in X standard, she is not eligible to be considered for admission. I do not accept the said contention of the learned Additional Government Pleader in as much as there is no such condition imposed in Clause 9(a) of the application form insisting the applicants to have studied Urdu language in X standard also. That apart, in the notification and guidelines issued for the admission to Diploma in Teacher Training Course for the academic year 2000-2001,there is no such restrictions imposed necessitating on the applicants to have studied the Urdu language from X standard onwards. In the absence of any such restriction, it cannot be contended that the Petitioner who complied with the condition of Clause 9(b) of the application form could be denied a seat on the ground that the Petitioner has not studied Urdu language in X standard. It is to be further seen as per the notification and guidelines, the eligibility criteria for seeking admission to Teacher Training Course is a pass in +2 examination. The candidates are admitted only on the basis of the marks obtained by them in +2 examination. The marks obtained by the candidates in X standard are not taken into consideration while deciding the merit of the candidates. Therefore, I do not find any nexus in insisting upon a candidate to undergo the Urdu language in X standard when the marks obtained in X standard are not taken into consideration for the purpose of admission. Admittedly, the candidate who have obtained lesser marks than the Petitioner have been selected. Therefore, the non consideration of the Petitioner for admission to the Teacher Training Course only on the ground that the Petitioner has not studied Urdu language in X standard cannot be sustained and the Petitioner who has obtained higher marks than the candidates with lesser marks is entitled to be admitted.
However, the candidates who have already been selected are admitted in the course. Therefore, there is no question of quashing the selection list. However, there will be a direction to the Respondents 1 and 2 to admit the Petitioner to the Teacher Training Course for the academic year 2000-2001. The said admission shall be made within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, this writ petition is allowed. No costs Consequently, W.M.P. No. 29578 of 2000 is closed.