ஆசிரியர் தகுதி
தேர்வு 2013 தமிழ் நாடு அரசு வழங்கிய 5% மதிப்பெண் தளர்வு சரியே இது அரசின்
கொள்கை இதில் நீதிமன்றம் தலையிடாது என சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் மற்றும்
டெல்லி உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் என இரண்டு முக்கிய நீதிமன்றங்கள் கூறிய பின் இந்த
5% மதிப்பெண் வழங்கும் அரசானையை ரத்து செய்து மதுரை உயர் நீதிமன்ற கிளை
உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது எனவே டெல்லி உச்ச நீதி மன்றத்தின் தீர்ப்பின்
அடிப்படையில் அதனை ஆதராமக கொண்டு அரசு மேல் முறையீடு செய்யும் பட்சத்தில்
கண்டிப்பாக மீண்டும் 5% மதிப்பெண் தளர்வு உறுதி தற்போது இதன் மூலம் பலர்
வேலைக்கு சென்று விட்டனர் இதனால் இந்த 2013 ஆசிரியர் தகுதி தேர்வுக்கு இது
பொறுந்தும் என்பது உறுதி
உச்ச நீதி மன்ற தீர்ப்பு
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Special Leave Petition (C) No.28043 of 2013
J U D G M E N T
K. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
1. The petitioner herein has approached the High Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Tamil Nadu Teacher Eligibility Test (TNTET) -2013 Notification/Advertisement No.13/2013 dated 22nd May, 2013 issued by the Teachers Recruitment Board and also sought a direction to the Board to issue fresh notification extending the constitutional benefits of reservation to TNTET by assigning minimum qualifying cut off marks for each communal category, in accordance with the prevailing reservation rule and also for the consequential reliefs.
2. The Madras High Court refused to grant the reliefs prayed for on the ground that the question as to whether relaxation/concessional marks to be granted or not to be granted is a policy matter, to be taken by the State Government and the court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitutional of India cannot give a positive direction to the State so as to reduce the minimum marks to any reserved category.
5. We find it difficult to accede to the request of the counsel. The question as to whether the cut off marks stipulated for the reserved category candidates have to be reduced or not, is entirely a matter for the State Government to decide. The Court exercising writ jurisdiction cannot grant such relaxation/concessional marks, as the same is the decision to be taken by the State Government. Taking into consideration a variety of factors, State/Authorities concerned in their wisdom would fix the cut off
marks and court cannot substitute its views to that of the experts. We, in such circumstances, are not inclined to interfere with these special leave petitions and the same are dismissed.
…………………………………J.
(K.S. Radhakrishnan)
………………………………...J.
(A.K. Sikri)
New Delhi,
December 13, 2013
உயர்நீதி மன்ற தீர்ப்பு சென்னை
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.01.2013
CORAM:
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE K.CHANDRU
W.P. Nos.30426, 31002, 31306, 31706, 31468,
32325, 34495, 34730, 34910 of 2012
and
W.P.Nos.1687 and 1705 of 2013
&
Connected Miscellaneous Petitions
10. In the instant
cases, for conducting the test, two Government Orders came to be passed.
A committee was appointed pursuant to the direction issued by this
Court, which had gone into the issue. It was decided not to relax the
standard from the minimum pass percentage. As rightly stated in the
counter affidavit, the qualifying marks for a pass in the Tamil Nadu
Teachers Eligibility Test has been fixed as 60% and above and the
Teacher Eligibility Test is only a pre-requisite eligibility test for
appointment as a Teacher. The qualifying marks are fixed in order to get
quality education to teach the Children. The
State Government has taken a policy decision not to compromise on the
quality of Teachers and decided not to grant relaxation. When such a
decision has been taken by the State Government, this Court is not
inclined to consider the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioners and no such direction can be issued by this Court to the
respondents to relax the standard or lower the standard, as contended by
the petitioners.
