STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. versus INDIRA KUMARI

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 469 · Decided: 13-08-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE, S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

STA TE OF HARY ANA AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
INDIRA KUMARl 
AUGUST 13, 2003 
[V .N. KHARE, CJ., AND S.B. SINHA, J.] 
B 
Service Law: 
Posts of Language teacher-Promotion to-Educational qualifications 
for-Earlier, besides other qualifications, Orientation Training (0. T.) was C 
essential for promotion to language teacher-Later, Junior Basic Training 
Course(JBTC), was treated equtvalent to 0. T.-0. T. or equivalent qualification 
was prescribed for appointment to language teacher-Held, by reason of 
Notification dated 12.3.1976, J.B.T.C. has been recognized as equivalent to 
0. T. whereon a judicial seal has been put-In absence of any contrary D 
provisions in the Rules, the contention that High Court could not have 
treated JBTC equivalent to 0. T rejected-This decision directed to be treated 
as prospective-Prospective Operataion of Judgment. 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Article 136-Treating of different degrees as equivalent-For the 
purpose of arriving at a decision as to whether one degree is equivalent to 
another or not, no order in terms of Article 136 of the Constitution is 
required to be passed-The decision of the State can also be inferred from 
E 
its conduct-On/acts, State of Haryana on 12.3.1976 gave out that JBTC is 
equivalent to 0. T.-Even the Director of Secondary Education by letter dated F 
5. 5.1995 conveyed the decision of the State to the said effect. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4301of1999. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.3.1998 of the Punjab and Haryana 
High Court in C.W.P. No. 2439of1998. 
G 
WITH 
C.A. Nos. 1280/2002, 4995-5000, 4627 and 5002 of2003. 
469 
H 
470 
SUPREME-COURT REPORTS [2003] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Mukul Rohtagi, Additional Solicitor General, Ms. Kavita Wadia and 
Neeraj Kumar Jain for the Appellants. 
Mahabir Singh, Ajay Pal, Rakesh Dahiya, Debasis Misra and S. Srinivasan 
for the Respondent. 
B 
Th<:: following Order of the Court was delivered: 
The respondents herein were in the service of the appellant-State as 
Language Teachers. They were appointed a long time back. 
The question which arises for consideration in these appeals is as to 
C whether the Certificate of Junior Basic Training Course (for short "J.B.T.') is 
equivalent to that of Orientation Training (for short "O.T."). 
The essential qualification for holding of the post of Language Teacher 
is said to be "(i) Metric from Punjab University or Board of School Education 
Haryana or an equivalent qualification recognised by the said Board; (ii) 
D Prabhakar (Honours in Hindi) from a recognised University; and (iii) pass in 
L TC (OT) examination in Hindi conducted by the Haryana Education 
Department or an equivalent qualification recognised by the Haryana Education 
Department-OR-Graduate from a recognised University with Hindi as an elective 
subject/M.A. in Hindi from a recognised University/B.A. (Honours) in Hindi 
E with B.T./B.Ed. or equivalent in all the cases. "The said qualification was laid 
down by the appellant-State by amending the Punjab Educational Service 
Rules, 1955 by reason of Punjab Educational service, Class-III School Cadre 
(First Amendment) Rules, 1995. 
It is not in dispute that in the 1955 Rules, the requirement was to hold 
F the· qualification of STC or OT Course. The course of study for JBT was 
started in 1957. On or about 12.3.1976, however, the State itself prescribed the 
qualifications for appointment of language Teachers, the material part whereof 
is as under: 
G 
"Subject : Qualifications for the appointment of language teachers. 
Hindi Teachers Metric Prabhakar O.T. or J.B.T. Punjabi Teachers Matric-
Giani O.T. or J.B.T. Sanskrit Teachers Shastri-0.T." 
H Yet again in the year 1983 some instructions were issued for appointment of 
. I 
STA TE v. INDIRA KUMAR! 
471 
Language Teachers wherein the qualifications were laid down as Matriculation A 
Prabhakar, L.T.C. or O.T. or equivalent qualification recognised by the State. 
When til.e said instructions were issued, a writ petition was filed by the 
Teachers in service on an apprehension that their services would be tenninated . 
The said writ petition titled Gurcharan Singh and Anr. v. State of Haryana 
and Ors. being Civil Writ Petition No. 206 of 1984 came to be decided and B 
was allowed by a judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court and it was 
held as under : 
" .... In the face of this factual position, the respondent authorities, 
to my mind, were entitled to prt::scribe any other course and more
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.