Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18169 (CHH)

RAKHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/3031/2021 · 2025-08-24

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:43101 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3031 of 2021  Rakhi D/o- Shri Lalakuram Aged About 30 Years R/o- Village- Chadiya, Post- Sogada, Tahsil And Thana - Manora, District- Jashpur (Chhattisgarh), District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Directorate Of Public Instruction Through Its Director, Indirawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Joint Director Education Division, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Shailendra Kumar Sharma, Advocate For State : Mr. Shubham Bajpayee, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25. 08.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, the petitioner most humbly and respectfully prays to this Hon'ble Court to issue appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the impugned memo dated 21.1.2021 (Annexure-P/1). 10.2 That, the petitioner most humbly and respectfully prays to this Hon'ble Court to issue appropriate writ/order/direction against the respondent authorities to grant an appointment to the petitioner against the post of the Teacher (English) (E-Cadre) forthwith considering SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.08.28 10:26:34 +0530 2 her result and merits involved, with all consequential benefits including salary, arrears, seniority etc. 10.3 Any other relief whatsoever, this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner participated in the recruitment process of Teacher (English) (E-Cadre) and after declaration of the result, he was called for document verification on 21.01.2021, but was disqualified by respondent No. 3 on the same date, on the ground that English Literature is not a subject in graduation, which was a required qualification. He would also submit that the petitioner has studied English Literature as one of the subjects in Part-I and Part-II of B.A. (Honours) and therefore, she meets the requisite eligibility criteria in terms of the advertisement and recruitment rules. He would contend that the requirement for the post of Teacher (English) (E-Cadre) was graduation with one subject of English Literature and the petitioner was qualified for the said post. He would pray to set-aside the impugned order dated 21.01.2021 and to allow the instant petition. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Shubham Bajpayee, Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, would oppose. He would submit that the petitioner has completed her graduation in B.A. (Honours) Part-III with the subject Geography, but English Literature was not one of the subjects in her graduation (B.A. (Honours) Part-III); therefore, her candidature was rejected by respondent No. 3. He would further submit that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. It would be necessary at this juncture to take note of the minimum eligibility criteria required for the post of Teacher (English) (E-Cadre), which is as 3 follows:- Minimum Qualifications for a Teacher (a) Graduation and 2 year Diploma in Elementary Education (by what ever name known) Or Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1 year graduate in Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.) Or Graduation with at least 45% marks and 1-year Bachelor in Education (B.Ed.), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition, Norms and Procedure) Regulations issued from time to time in this regard. Or Higher Secondary or its equivalent with at least 50% marks and 4 years B.A./B.Sc.Ed. Or B.A.Ed./B.Sc.Ed. Or Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1 year B.Ed. (Special Education) And (b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose. The subjects of the bachelor’s degree above are as follows:- S. No. Subject Subject Group (1) (2) (3) 1. English English Literature should be a subject at Graduation level. 2. Biology Any two subjects from Chemistry, Botany, Zoology, Military Science and Geology should be there at graduate level. 3. Mathematics Mathematics with any two of the following subjects- Physics/ Chemistry/ Electronics/ Computer Science/ Statistics/ Military Science/ Geology. 4. Agriculture Agriculture 5. Exercise Passed Higher Secondary Exam and Graduation with D.P.Ed. or B.P.Ed. 6. A perusal of the advertisement as well as recruitment rules would make it 4 clear that for recruitment to the post of Teacher (English) (E-Cadre), English Literature must be one of the subjects at the Graduation level. 7. Perusal of the mark-sheet furnished by the petitioner would make it clear that the petitioner, except for the first two years of her degree course, does not have the subject ‘English Literature’ in the last year of her course, and she completed her graduation with Geography. Therefore, it cannot be said that the graduation of the petitioner was with English Literature as a compulsory subject, as is required under the rules and the advertisement governing the field. 8. The respondent authorities, after verification of documents, found that the petitioner has done her graduation in Geography, wherein English Literature is not a compulsory subject, and the mark-sheet of the petitioner itself shows that English Literature was not a subject for the last year of her course. Hence, this Court does not find any illegality on the part of the respondent authorities in reaching the conclusion that the petitioner is ineligible for the post of Teacher (English) (E-Cadre). 9. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant