07 September 2022
Delhi
High Court (DB)
What
are the minimum qualifying marks for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS)
candidates for appointment on the post of TGT (Urdu) Female (Post Code: 53/21)
in DOE? – Delhi High Court asks Delhi Government
Ms.
Muslima Parveen appeared in the recruitment process for appointment on the post
of TGT (Urdu) Female (Post Code: 53/21) in DOE, GNCTD. She obtained 39.39/100
marks in Section A and 62.62/100 marks in Section B i.e., total 102.01/200
marks. She was not shortlisted for uploading the e-dossier by DSSSB. Being aggrieved,
Muslima filed an Original Application (O.A. No. 1241/2022) before the Central Administrative
Tribunal (CAT), Delhi. Vide Order dated 13.07.2022, CAT dismissed the Original
Application.
Being
aggrieved by the Order passed by the CAT, Muslima filed a writ petition [W.P. (C)
No. 12996/2022] before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
Muslima,
in her petition, submitted that the cut off marks stipulated by DSSSB for EWS
candidates are 108.33 marks, whereas for UR candidates is 83.84 marks, which by
itself is illogical, unjustified and amounts to no reservation for the EWS
candidates. She also submitted that there is no justification as to how she was
awarded with 39.39 marks when each question was of 1 mark.
Muslima
also contended that the condition that a candidate must qualify ‘Section A’ and
‘Section B’ separately is unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 21 and
21A of the Constitution of India and because of this arbitrary condition, 90%
vacancies of TGT (Urdu) Female (Post Code: 53/21) in DOE have remained unfilled.
Total 571 vacancies were advertised by DSSSB vide Advertisement dated 27.05.2021,
out of which only 57 candidates obtained marks equal to, or above than, the
minimum qualifying marks stipulated by DSSSB. It may be noted that total
sanctioned posts of TGT (Urdu) Female in DOE are 1,032 posts, out of which 917
posts are lying vacant. That is, in other words, more than 85% vacancies are
lying vacant for last several years and DSSSB and DOE, despite advertisements, have
not been able to fill these vacancies. Unfilled vacancies directly violate the
right to education of children who wants to study Urdu language as a subject.
Keeping
in view the acute shortage of qualified Urdu teachers, Delhi Minorities Commission
also sought a reply from the DSSSB. Consequently, DSSSB vide letter dated
15.07.2022 informed the Delhi Minorities Commission that DSSSB has taken a
decision w.r.t. TGT (Urdu), TGT (Punjabi) and TGT (Sanskrit) posts that “the
mandatory minimum qualifying marks will be applicable only in Section B, which
is domain subject specific. There will not be any minimum qualifying marks in
Section A. However, aggregate marks of both Section A & Section B will be
reckoned for preparing the final merit list. This change in policy will be
applicable only in r/o vacancies of posts to be notified by DSSSB in future.”
Muslima
submitted that the aforesaid decision of DSSSB should not be restricted to the
future vacancies but should also be applied to the vacancies advertised in the
year 2021.
Considering
the submissions made by the petitioner, Delhi High Court issued notice to the
Government of NCT of Delhi and directed the Government to file reply within 4
weeks. Directive paragraphs of the Order dated 07.09.2022 are reproduced below
for ready reference: -
“1. Issue
notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for respondents.
2. Learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the information, there is no
minimum qualifying marks prescribed for the Economically Weaker Section (‘EWS’)
category of candidates in Section A and Section B. He further submits that
though each question bore one mark, surprisingly the petitioner has been
awarded with 39.39 % in Section A.
3. Let counter
affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed
within two weeks thereafter.
4. List on
25.11.2022.
5. Respondent
shall also specify as to whether, there is any prescribed minimum qualifying
marks in Section A for EWS category, and further they shall explain as to how
petitioner was awarded with 39.39 % marks when each question had one mark
allotted to it.”
[Muslima
Parveen Vs. DSSSB & Anr., WP No. 12996/2022, Date of order = 07.09.2022,
next date of hearing = 25.11.2022]
https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/home.php
Anuj Aggarwal
Advocate
D-26/A, First
Floor, Jangpura Extension,
New Delhi - 110014
483, Block-2,
Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court,
New Delhi-110003
Mobile –
9891403206
Landline – 011 -
35554905
Email – anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment