In response to the government clarification on teachers recruitment published in the Nagaland Post, dated 27/05/2012, it is felt necessary to project the true legal factual on the issue the NCTE Act 1993, and the RTE Act 2009 unambiguously provides that minimum qualification for recruitment of elementary school teachers must be 10+2 with PSTE and 10+2+3 with B.ed and in the matter of selection of teachers, only when there are insufficient trained candidates, the untrained candidates may be appointed and it is made mandatory that the untrained appointees must undergo the required training within five years of the appointment. Considering this the government of Nagaland Directorate of School Education has also assured notification 28/11/2011 to the effect that in recruitment of elementary school teachers, the candidates possessing PSTE qualification shall be given preference over other candidates without such qualification.
The said notification was issued with the approval of the cabinet. The provision of the said two acts and the state Govt. notification dated 28/11/11, are clear in that. So long as trained and qualified candidates are available only their cases can be considered for appointment. It is only when the number of post exceeds the number of trained candidates against the excess post. The cases of untrained candidates may be considered. The above been the legal position, when advertisement was floated by the Dept. of school Edu. Nagaland for recruitment of school teachers, the trained candidates considering the fact that the NO of post exceeded the trained candidates submitted an representation to the Govt. to demanding that the question for the written exam must be set purely from the professional teaching course and 90% of the vacancies be reserved for the trained candidates. The Director, SCERT Nagaland, also, by letter dated 16th November 2011, wrote to the Commissioner Secretary, school education and SCERT, in Nagaland Kohima, that the State Level Education Committee (SLEC) has decided that “Special Preference” will be given to candidates who possess professional qualification; that in this regard it has become necessary to clearly define the meaning to avoid the confusion and serious problem that may arise; that, as a department the SCERT had a discussion and decided to forward either one of two suggestion;
1. First preference to be given to candidates having professional qualification. Only when vacancies still exist after this should the untrained candidates be considered.
2. In case above is not followed, a lumpsum of atleast fifteen (15) marks be added to the professionally trained candidates as was done in an earlier examination conducted by the NBSE.
It was also urged that atleast one of the above suggestion should be considered as otherwise there would be no meaning in conducting professional training programme.
To the said letter, the government of Nagaland, Department of School Education by letter dated 6/1/2012 wrote to the Director, (SCERT) Nagaland, that the government has approved to give first preference to candidates having professional qualification.
Here, it is also felt necessary to bring out the fact that the Hon’ble Minister School education and Principal Director School Education at a meeting on of the officials of the ANPSTA with the honourable, minister school education in the office chamber of the minister, the Hon’ble Minister gave oral assurance that the case of the trained candidates will be considered separately to the untrained candidates; that separate list of result will be maintained for trained and untrained teachers and that all the trained teachers who qualifies the written exam would be given appointment. The same assurance was given by the Principal Director School education and the Director SCERT on the same date at separate meetings held in their respective office.
The above been the position that trained teachers appeared the examination I the belief that the department will act in accordance with the provision of the NCTE Acts 1993, RTE Act 2009 and the notification dated 28 Nov 2011, and they clear clarification given in the letter dated 6/1/2012 and the verbal assurances given by no less than the Hon’Ble Minister School Education Nagaland, Principal Director, School education and the Director, SCRET. However, that interview was conducted quite contrary to the provisions of law and the assurances given by the aforesaid officials. Sadly and surprisingly enough, the Principal Director of School Education Nagaland is also flatly denying that any assurance as stated above was ever given by the department to the trained teachers.
No surprisingly, the department is taking the stand that the cabinet took a decision to recruit “ Best available candidates” from both trained and untrained candidates, which is not only in violation of the relevant provisions of law but also contrary to the notification that preference will be given to trained candidates above untrained candidates. The cabinet cannot validly make any decision contrary to the provisions of law. Also, the decisions was never notified publicly and therefore, cannot be legally acted upon.
Further the department has also sought to project that preference was given to the trained candidates in the form of the minimum percentage of 45%, the setting of 20% marks from the syllabus of PSTE/B.ed and in the case of trained and untrained candidates scoring equal marks, preference being given to the trained candidates. Such so called preference is neither preference in the true sense nor one provided under relevant provision of the NCTE Act 1993 and the RTE Act 2009. The said Acts mandatorily requires that recruitment of teachers can be made from trained candidates and no other. Even if the number of post exceeds the number of trained candidates, the untrained candidates maybe considered only against the excess post as per the provisions of law.
Therefore, the arguments that certain advantages were given to the trained candidates is not tenable.
The department has also sought to clarify that according to the NCTE guidelines and the TET a candidates should scored a minimum of 60% in order to be eligible for selection and that many trained candidates who have scored even less than 60% in written were selected. It is true that the guidelines and the TET requires a candidate to secure 60% in order to be eligible, but it is to be noted that the examination conducted should be professional oriented examination and not based on general knowledge questions as w s done in the instant examination and the examination should be one in which only professionally qualified candidates are permitted to appear. The department cannot justify in anyway their Act of making qualified trained candidates and untrained and therefore unqualified candidates appear together at an examination meant for professionally trained candidates by setting question papers of a general nature which has no connection with the profession for which the selection is conducted.
Lastly, the department has emphasized B.ed/PSTE trained candidates have to undergo TET for recruitment to the post of teachers against such sanction post made by the government of India; but they have failed to note that untrained candidates are not eligible to undergo TET for recruitment of teachers. The TET is meant only for trained candidates to test their competency in the profession of teaching, for which they have undergone the training. In the instant case, contrary to the law, the department has permitted untrained candidates who are not eligible for the TET to appear the same together with qualified trained candidates. The test/exam was also not based on professional competency but in the line of general recruitment examination.
Thus, it is apparent that the clarifications issued by the department have no legal basis. The examination has been conducted in utter violation of the NCTE Act 1993, RTE Act 2009 and the notification dated 28th Nov 2011 and contrary to the assurances given by the department to the trained candidates. No amount of clarification or explanation can validate the illegal actions of the department.
Akhobu Veswu
General Secretarty, ANPSTA
Suyimramok,
President, ANPSTA
