Sri Keshab Das vs The State Of Tripura & Ors.

Further, he also referred point No.23 wherein it has been also mentioned as under:

Referring the same, Learned Counsel also submitted that the revised norms will be applicable from the Academic Session 2016-17 onwards and the 2^nd year of the course starting on 2014-16 but the present petitioner enrolled himself in B.Ed (Special Education) under ODL mode during the Academic Session 2014-16 and in view of the said regulation, there was no restriction for a candidate to have 50% marks for admission to B.Ed, Special Education Course (ODL Course) and furthermore, Learned Counsel also submitted that since the TRBT has not disputed his subsequent graduation degree, so, the TRBT at this stage cannot reject his candidature for recommendation for appointment to the post of Special Educator. So, in summing up, Learned Counsel urged for allowing this writ petition.

In the said notification it was also mentioned the last date for submission of online application was 17.03.2025. From the aforesaid essential qualification, it also appears that a candidate should have 50% marks either in the graduation or post-graduation from recognized University with B.Ed (Special Education) or its equivalent from a RCI recognized Institution and must be registered with RCI with further condition that relaxation upto 5% in the qualifying marks will be allowed to the candidates belonging to the SC/ST/PH Category. The petitioner is a SC candidate. He accordingly, applied for the post and secured 89 marks out of 150. This has not been disputed by the respondent. It is also admitted by the petitioner that in the year 2004-2005 he obtained his graduation (3 years Degree Course) from Tripura University and secured 33.57% which his less than 50%. Thereafter, in the year 2023 he further obtained his graduation degree in Arts from Rabindranath Tagore University and secured 68.80% and prior to that he got admitted in B.Ed Special in Education from NEHU during the Academic Year-2014-2016 and granted the degree of Bachelor Education in Special Education through Distance Education with specialization area of visual impairment and obtained the degree from said North Eastern Hill University. The TRBT issued the notification for online application on 10.02.2025, so, prior to that he obtained his two graduation degrees and B.Ed in Special Education during the Academic Session 2014-2016. The State-respondents in their counter-affidavit stated that as the petitioner secured 33.57%, so, he was not eligible. But the fact that in the subsequent graduation program he obtained 68.60%. The State-respondents in their counter-affidavit stated that as per NCTE guidelines of 2009 and 2014 regulation, 50% marks in the Senior Secondary Level or its equivalent examination for admission. But surprisingly, in the notification of the TRBT through which the TRBT invited online application, nowhere it has been mentioned that NCTE guidelines would be applied in the present case, rather it has been specifically mentioned that the B.Ed (Special Education) should be from a RCI recognized Institution and must be registered with RCI. Rather, the State-respondents relied upon the regulations of Rehabilitation Council of India wherein the regulation of Rehabilitation Council of India which was published on 15^th May, 2015 in para No.5.2 specifically mentioned that atleast 50% marks would be required either in the Bachelor Degree or in the Master Degree in Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, Bachelors in Engineering or Technology with specialization in Science and Mathematics with 55% or any other qualification equivalent thereto are eligible for admission to the program, but that regulation of 2015 would be applicable only for the candidates for the Academic Session 2015-2016 and revised norms will be applicable for the Academic Session 2016-2017 onwards and the 2^nd year of the course will be starting from 2015 and 2016, so, the said regulation of 2015 would not be applied in the case of the present petitioner and more so, the respondents nowhere in their counter-affidavit disputed the securing of 68.80% marks by the petitioner when he obtained subsequent degree from the Rabindranath Tagore University and the same has been specifically mentioned in para No.17. Thus, it appears that the stands taken by the respondents in their counter-affidavit and the submission made by Learned Senior G.A. appears to be contradictory to each other and furthermore, the respondents in their counter-affidavit stated that on the last date of submission of application, i.e. on 17.03.2025 the petitioner did not have any valid registration certificate under RCI. In this regard, on perusal of the rejoinder and its annexures submitted by the petitioner, it appears that he was firstly registered with RCI w.e.f. 05.03.2020 which was valid for a period of 5 years. Thereafter, he applied for renewal on 21.02.2025, i.e. prior to expiration of the said period and after that, the Rehabilitation Council of India issued one E-Registration certificate (Annexure-3) against CRR No.167426 from which it appears that his initial certificate which was issued on 05.03.2020 was valid upto 28.06.2030, although the renewal date has been shown as 30.06.2025. So, the stand taken by the respondents that at the time of online application, he did not have the valid e-registration certificate does not have any legal force. Furthermore, the respondents although in their counter-affidavit referred about the NCTE guidelines but in the annexures they also relied upon the regulation of 2015 issued by the Rehabilitation Council of India on May, 2015 which was effecting from the Academic Session 2015-2016 and as already stated that the petitioner undergo his B.Ed (Special Education) 2014-2015 Academic Session. So, the said regulation of May, 2015 also would not be applicable in the case of the present petitioner. In addition to that the petitioner as already stated applied online and thereafter, he was issued admit card by the authority and he appeared in the selection test for Special Educator (SC/ST 2025) wherein he secured 89 marks out of 150 as a SC candidate. So, it appears that the respondent TRBT after knowing the academic careers, i.e. the two graduation programmes as well as his B.Ed (Special Education) program permitted him to appear in the examination and in the counter-affidavit also nothing has been disputed by the State-respondents in this regard. At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that out of 112 posts as advertised, 30 posts were reserved for SC candidates and those posts could not be filled up and still there are so many posts lying vacant for want of recommendation and as such the petitioner as a deserving candidate, who has qualified the process and secured the requisite marks also be considered for recommendation for appointment to the post of Special Educator which has been arbitrarily denied by the respondents TRBT.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner also at the time of hearing referred the Rehabilitation Council of India Act 1992 and referring the provision of Sections 19 and 21 he also submitted that no step was taken by the respondents for removal the name of the petitioner from the register of the Rehabilitation Council of India.