5. In the case of Hina Kausar Mohammad Riyaz, the Division Bench at Aurangabad had taken up these writ petitions as a group since a common limited prayer was sought that the Petitioners be permitted to resort to the registration of self-certification/ assessment. The State had taken a stand that the Petitioners, which is the case in present petitions as well, had been found guilty in a scam which took place regarding the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) and, therefore, they are not entitled to the relief they have sought. The Division Bench negatived this contention. The Division Bench observed thus:
“6. There is no dispute before us in all these matters that there are three modes/channels for becoming eligible to appear for the TAIT Exam. The first mode is, a person who has D.Ed qualification and who passes the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) conducted by the State of Maharashtra, commonly known as the MH-TET. The second mode for being eligible to
appear for the TAIT Exam is, that a candidate has D.Ed qualification and has passed the Central TET (CTET). The third mode is that the candidate must be a Graduate and must have B.Ed. Qualifications.
….. ….. ….. ….. …..
8. We have not permitted such teachers involved in the scam to appear for the TAIT Exam from the channel of the TET qualification, the first channel discussed above. However, those teachers who are alleged to have been involved in the TET scam and who have passed either the C-TET or are Graduates with B.Ed qualification, are not precluded from appearing for the TAIT as there is no provisions cited before us that such candidates should be prohibited for recruitment after passing the TAIT,
….. ….. ….. ….. …..
12. The learned AGP and the learned Advocates for the Respondents have vehemently opposed these Petitions on the ground that once the names of the Petitioners have appeared in the TET scam, no matter that they are CTET qualified or are Graduates with B.Ed. qualification, they would not be allowed to appear for the TAIT Exam or participate in the recruitment process on the basis that they have passed the TAIT Exam.
13. We find that there is no specific/express bar prescribed either under the Rules or under any GR. A candidate who has cleanly passed the CTET or has acquired the qualification of Graduate + B.Ed., which are the two channels for being eligible for the TAIT Exam, involvement in the TET scam would not water down their results in the other two streams, since they have cleanly passed the said examinations and there is no allegation of malpractices.
14. Therefore, we conclude that if there are candidates whose names are involved in the TET scam and their performances have been cancelled and they are neither CTET nor Graduate plus B.Ed. Qualified, they would not be permitted to appear for the TAIT exam until they are exonerated and their result of the TET exam is restored, since without passing the TET,
these persons cannot be eligible for the TAIT.
….. ….. ….. ….. …..
19. Insofar as the CTET candidates are concerned, those who have appeared for the exams on or before the date on which the TAIT exams were conducted, they can be considered for the Pavitra portal in view of the policy of the Government, subject to their passing of the CTET. However, those who have appeared for CTET weeks or months after the TAIT Exam was held between February-March, 2023, they cannot be held eligible to appear for TAIT Exams which were held earlier, since the CTET was a requirement for appearing for the TAIT Exam”.The Division Bench thus noted three modes for becoming eligible to appear for the Teacher Aptitude and Intelligence Test (TAIT) examination. The Division Bench found that even assuming the Petitioners have indulged in malpractices in the TET examination since they would qualify under the other two modes, they are not to be denied relief. The Division Bench held that there was no embargo to appear for the exam even if a candidate is found guilty of malpractices in one mode of the qualification stream. The Division Bench accordingly directed that the Petitioners be permitted to resort to registration of self-certification/ assessment subject to other legal requirements.
10. Both writ petitions are disposed of in the above terms.
Views: 2
Leave a Reply