Anil Dev Singh, J.— Admit.
Since the question involved in the appeal is a short one we proceed to dispose of the same.
2. By this appeal the appellant challenges the impugned order dated 4th October, 1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in CW No: 6025/1999. Brief facts giving rise to the appeal are as follow:—
3. The appellant is a graduate with Hindi as one of the subjects. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board she applied for the post of a Primary Assistant Teacher in the MCD under the OBC Category. In the selection process the appellant secured 43.88 marks whereas the cut-off score was 43.33 marks. Despite the fact that the appellant secured more marks than persons who were selected under the OBC Category, she did not find her name in the list of selected candidates. The appellant is stated to have met the Secretary of the Selection Board and submitted a representation. The appellant was informed that since she had not studied Hindi at the Higher Secondary level, she was not selected.
4. The appellant being aggrieved by the action of the Selection Board filed a writ petition in this Court. The writ petition, however, was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 4th October, 1999 on the ground that the appellant had not studied Hindi at the Higher Secondary level.
5. In order to determine the question as to whether the appellant was qualified for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher, it is necessary to refer to the qualification prescribed in the advertisement which was issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board. The relevant part of the advertisement reads as under:
“A. Post Code 08/98 Primary Teachers
Total Number of Posts: 3008 (Unreserved 1035, ST-626, OBC.552 P.H 63 Ex. Ser.21) includes backlog vacancies.
Educational qualification & work experience:
(a) Sr. Secondary or equivalent with 2 yrs Teachers Training Course or equivalent from a recognised Board/University.
(b) Degree in any discipline or equivalent with degree in Education or equivalent from a recognised University.
(c) Professional qualification ETE from the DIET is run by SCERT, Delhi with 50% marks (45% in case of SC/ST/OBC).
Note: The candidate should have passed the required language at secondary or senior secondary level.”
Subsequently, the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board issued a corrigendum which reads as follows;
CORRIGENDUM
Reference Advertisement No. 02/98 for the recruitment of Primary Teachers and Nursery Teachers in M.C.D and Assistant Teachers in N.D.M.C which appeared in the Times of India and Indian Express on 11/06/98 and Dainik Jagran and Jansatta and 12/06/98, following rectifications are made:
1. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI
Post Code: 08/98 Primary Teacher
S.N
Particulars
Advertised
To be read as
1.
Education Qualification Note under 1 (C)
Note: The candidate should have passed the required language at Secondary or Senior Secondary level
Note: The candidate should have the required i.e HINDI at Secondary or Senior Secondary level.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant argued that the appellant was wrongly rejected on the spurious ground of her not having a qualification prescribed by the advertisement read with the corrigendum. Learned counsel appearing for the Board and the MCD submitted that as per the qualification prescribed in the advertisement and the corrigendum for appointment to the post of Primary Assistant Teacher, the requirement of Hindi at the Secondary level or Senior Secondary level is the essential qualification which a candidate must possess. According to them, in case a candidate having a Bachelor of Arts degree with Hindi did not pass the higher secondary level with Hindi, he/she would not be eligible for the post of Primary Assistant Teacher. We fail to see the logic and the rationale of the argument of the learned counsel for the MCD and the Board. Undoubtedly, Bachelor of Arts degree with Hindi, is a higher qualification than the higher secondary with Hindi.
7. In the counter affidavit filed by the MCD it has not been stated as to how the study of Hindi as a language at higher secondary or intermediate level by the candidates is more relevant than the study of Hindi as a language in BA pass course for the job requirement. Nothing has been brought to our notice by the learned counsel appearing for the Board and the MCD which could justify the stand of the respondents that the study of Hindi as a language at higher secondary level by a candidate has a nexus with the object sought to be achieved, which object by the study at Hindi at B.A level by a candidate cannot be achieved. No study or evaluation or analysis has been placed before us to show that the candidates having Hindi as a subject at the secondary level are better qualified and equipped to teach primary students than the candidates having Hindi at the graduate level. In case the argument of the learned counsel appearing for the MCD and the Board is taken to its logical conclusion it will lead to absurd results. There may be a case where a person did not take up Hindi as a language at higher secondary level and took it up at higher levels, namely, B.A, M.A and Ph. D. Surely, it can not be said that the person who had taken Hindi as a subject at the Graduate level, Masters level or Doctorate level is less qualified for the job than the person who had taken up Hindi as a subject at the higher secondary level. The counter affidavit of the MCD is not at all helpful for the purpose of coming to the conclusion that there is any valid justification for the stand of the Board and the M.C.D in considering higher secondary with Hindi as an essential requirement for the post of Primary Assistant Teachers. The invidious distinction made by the Board and the MCD for ignoring candidates with higher qualification is unwarranted and without any valid basis.
8. It is significant to note that nothing is stated in the counter affidavit as to how Hindi at the Higher Secondary level is helpful for teaching primary level students. What is so special about Hindi at the secondary level, which attribute Hindi at higher level is lacking has not been explained in the counter affidavit or the arguments of the learned counsel for the respondents. Hindi as a language has not been mentioned in the advertisement as a special qualification for imparting education to the students at the primary level. It cannot be assumed by any stretch of imagination that a candidate possessing higher qualification like B.A with Hindi or M.A with Hindi will be less efficient in teaching primary classes than a person possessing lesser qualification such as higher secondary with Hindi.
9. We are supported in our view by a decision of the Allahabad High Court in Laxmi Narayan Yadav v. District Inspector of Schools and Ors., 1988 (3) SLR Allahabad 42, in which it was held as follows:—
10. As regards the eligibility of respondent No. 3 for the post of Lecturer in Hindi, the learned counsel for the respondents drew our attention to N.B (Note) (2) below the rule prescribing minimum qualifications for ‘Hindi Teachers for Intermediate’ contained in Appendix A which provides as follows:
“The Hindi Teachers may not be required to have a Degree in Sanskrit in those institutions where qualified Sanskrit teacher is available to teach the Sanskrit portion of the Hindi Course.”
11. The above note clarifies the intention why B.A with Sanskrit was kept as an essential qualification for a Hindi Teacher for Intermediate Classes. The person should be such who can also teach Sanskrit portion of the Hindi Course. The qualification prescribed for Sanskrit Teacher for Intermediate is ‘M.A with Sanskrit preferably trained.’ As respondent No. 3 is M.A in Sanskrit, he is fully qualified to teach Sanskrit also. Consequently, respondent No. 3 cannot be said to be disqualified for being appointed teacher in Hindi simply because he is not ‘B.A with Sanskrit’, especially when he is M.A in Sanskrit and is qualified to teach Sanskrit portion of Hindi Course, so that requirement of ‘B.A with Sanskrit’ is not applicable in his case. Moreover, respondent No. 3 may not be having Sanskrit as a subject for his Bachelors' degree. He is, however, having Master's Degree in Sanskrit, which is certainly a higher qualification than B.A with Sanskrit. Consequently, the claim of respondent No. 3 could not be rejected merely on the ground that he is not ‘B.A with Sanskrit.’ When he is admittedly M.A Sanskrit'.
12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 4th October, 1999 is set aside. Since the appellant has higher marks than the persons who have been selected in OBC category, we direct the respondent Board to send the recommendation for appointment of the appellant to the post of Assistant Primary Teacher to the M.C.D On receipt of the recommendation, the M.C.D shall appoint the appellant as Assistant Primary Teacher.
13. The appeal stands disposed of.