UPTET : New Date for hearing : 16 April 2012 , regarding Stay on PRT Teachers Selection in UP
Case Status - Allahabad
Pending
| |
Writ - A : 76039 of 2011 [Varanasi]
| |
Petitioner:
|
YADAV KAPILDEV LAL BAHADUR
|
Respondent:
|
STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS
|
Counsel (Pet.):
|
ALOK KUMAR YADAV
|
Counsel (Res.):
|
C.S.C.
|
Category:
|
Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Primary Education (teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Appointment
|
Date of Filing:
|
21/12/2011
|
To Be Listed on:
|
16/04/2012 in Court No. 33
|
This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer).
Still there are many hurdles and to make an end to all this a PIL supreme court can be a good option.
There are 2 -ways for PIL in supreme court :
1. When matter of many candidates reach (though letter/post) to Supreme Court then it can be possible supreme court convert this matter into PIL/writ in the interest of large public.
RTE : From Today onward , Education become Fundamental Right of Every Children
आज से शिक्षा हर बच्चे का मूल अधिकार
नई दिल्ली।। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने राइट टु एजुकेशन कानून, 2009 ( शिक्षा का अधिकार ) को संवैधानिक रूप से वैध माना है। इससे देशभर के सरकारी और प्राइवेट स्कूलों में गरीबों को 25% निशुल्क सीटें समान रूप से मिल सकेंगी। चीफ जस्टिस एस . एच . कपाड़िया , जस्टिस के . एस . राधाकृष्णन और जस्टिस स्वतंत्र कुमार की बेंच ने बहुमत से दिए फैसले में कहा कि कानून सरकारी और गैर-सहायता प्राप्त प्राइवेट स्कूलों में समान रूप से लागू होगा। सरकारी सहायता नहीं लेने वाले प्राइवेट अल्पसंख्यक स्कूल ही इसके दायरे से बाहर होंगे।
जस्टिस राधाकृष्णन ने इससे असहमति जताते हुए राय जाहिर की कि यह कानून उन गैर - सहायता प्राप्त प्राइवेट स्कूलों और अल्पसंख्यक संस्थानों पर लागू नहीं होगा , जो सरकार से कोई सहायता नहीं लेते। चीफ जस्टिस कपाड़िया और जस्टिस स्वतंत्र कुमार का फैसला जस्टिस राधाकृष्णन से अलग था। उन्होंने कहा कि कानून गैर - सहायता प्राप्त प्राइवेट स्कूलों पर भी लागू होगा। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने स्पष्ट किया कि उसका फैसला आज से प्रभावी होगा। यानी पहले हुए दाखिलों पर यह लागू नहीं होगा।
सुप्रीम कोर्ट की तीन सदस्यीय बेंच ने पिछले साल 3 अगस्त को प्राइनेट स्कूलों द्वारा दाखिल याचिकाओं पर अपना फैसला सुरक्षित रखा था। इन याचिकाओं में कहा गया था कि शिक्षा का अधिकार कानून निजी शैक्षणिक संस्थानों को अनुच्छेद 19 (1) जी के अंतर्गत दिए गए अधिकारों का उल्लंघन करता है , जिसमें निजी प्रबंधकों को सरकार के दखल के बिना अपने संस्थान चलाने की स्वायतत्ता प्रदान की गई है। मामले में लंबे समय तक चली जिरह के दौरान केंद्र ने कानून के पक्ष में दलीलें देते हुए कहा कि इसका उद्देश्य सामाजिक और आर्थिक रूप से पिछड़े वर्गों के जीवन स्तर में सुधार लाना है। केंद्र ने जोर देकर कहा कि समाज के विभिन्न वर्गों में योग्यता और प्रतिभा को सामाजिक और आर्थिक विभिन्नता से अलग रखा जाना चाहिए।
यह कानून संविधान में अनुच्छेद 21 ( ए ) के प्रावधान के जरिए तैयार किया गया था , जो कहता है कि सरकार छह से 14 वर्ष की आयु के सभी बच्चों को निशुल्क और अनिवार्य शिक्षा प्रदान करे। याचिकाओं में दलील दी गई थी कि शिक्षा का अधिकार कानून असंवैधानिक है और बुनियादी अधिकारों का उल्लंघन करता है। याचिकाकर्ताओं के अनुसार कानून की धारा -3 गैर - सहायता प्राप्त निजी और अल्पसंख्यक संस्थानों पर एक अनिवार्य बाध्यता लगाती है कि वह दाखिला लेने के लिए आने वाले आसपास के हर बच्चे को बिना किसी चयन प्रक्रिया के दाखिला दे
News : Navbharat Times (12.4.12)
See Case Details of AIIMS in HighCourt of Delhi about NOT Cancelling Exam (Merely on apprehensions)
हाईकोर्ट-सिर्फ डर की वजह से की बड़े पैमाने पर गड़बड़ी हुई है से/ कुछ आरोपों के कारण पूरी परीक्षा रद करना ठीक न हीं
N THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 638/2012 and CM 1375/2012Decided on: 10th February, 2012IN THE MATTER OF DR. PRASHANT DASS AND ORS. ..... PetitionersThrough: Mr. O.P. Gulabani, AdvocateversusUOI AND ORS. ..... RespondentsThrough: Mr. Asit Tiwari, Advocate for R-1/UOI. Mr. Mehmood Pracha, Advocate with Mr. SumitBabbar and Mr. Sahil Singh Chauhan, Advocates for R-2/AIIMS.
CORAMHON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
CORAMHON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition is filed by five petitioners praying inter alia for quashing of the All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Exxamination-2012 (in short ‘the ÁIPGMEE-2012), held simultaneously in 156 centres all over the country on 08.01.2012. The petitioners have also sought directions to respondent No.2/AIIMS to evolve a mechanism to prevent recurrence of such an incident of cheating in the entrance examination, which occurred in a Centre at Noida, as noted in the press clippings.
2. On 31.01.2012, counsel for respondent No.2/AIIMS had stated on instructions that a letter dated 24.01.2012 had been addressed by the Sub-Dean (Examination), AIIMS to the Director General, Directorate General of health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, stating inter alia that the incident of cheating in respect of the All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination-2012 held on 08.01.2012 was found to have occurred only at one examination centre situated at Noida and that the Centre Supervisor at the said centre had submitted a comprehensive report, which was in turn forwarded for investigation to the Crime Branch, Delhi Police. The report of the investigation was awaited. In the report dated 10.01.2012 prepared by the Centre Supervisor at the Noida Examination Centre, a mention was made of three candidates from whose possession, some electronic gadgets were recovered by the police after investigation.
Though on the last date, it was stated by the counsel for respondent No.2/AIIMS that apart from the aforesaid stray incident that took place only in one centre at Noida and the examinations in all the remaining 155 examination centres were held peacefully and without any hindrance, respondent No.2/AIIMS was directed to file a brief affidavit in that regard.
3. An affidavit has been filed by respondent No.2/AIIMS on 08.02.2012, wherein it is stated that the entrance examination in all the centres all over the country had commenced at 10 AM on 08.01.2012 and that the examination went on smoothly at all centres except at the Noida centre situated at Vishwa Bharti Public School, Arun Vihar, Sector-28. When the examination was in progress at the aforesaid centre, at about 10:20 AM, out of the two invigilators in the Noida centre, one invigilator had reported that one candidate possessed a mobile phone, which was subsequently confiscated and handed over to the Centre Supervisor, who in turn informed the AIIMS examination control room about the incident. At 11:30 AM on the same date, four officers from the Crime Branch, Delhi Police came to AIIMS with the scanned copy of the questions so as to verify as to whether the questions in the scanned document matched with the original booklet of AIPGMEE-2012. Upon scrutiny of the documents, it was observed that 2-3 pages of the question booklet appeared to have been scanned, which also contained the images of a ball pen that is supplied by AIIMS for use by the candidates appearing in the said examination. Later on, it was revealed that the AIIMS representative, who was supervising the Noida Centre, had deposited a seizure report of the mobile phone that had been seized from a candidate and the said phone was in turn handed over to the Crime branch officials, who had visited the centre later on and had apprehended the candidate found to be cheating in the examination. It is further averred in the affidavit that the Crime Branch, Delhi Police has interrogated the said candidate and two other candidates and some electronic gadgets were recovered by the Crime Branch from all the three candidates. It is stated that the matter continues to remain under investigation of the Crime Branch, Delhi Police.
4. In view of the averments made in the aforesaid affidavit filed by respondent No.3/AIIMS, it is apparent that the incident of cheating is found to have occurred on 8.1.2012 only at one examination centre and that too in a centre which was situated at Noida, where a mobile phone is stated to have been recovered from one candidate and some electronic gadgets were recovered from two candidates. Apart from the aforesaid incident, the AIPGMEE-2012 appears to have been conducted peacefully all over the remaining 155 examination centers. A total number of 71,968 candidates are stated to have applied for sitting in the aforesaid examination and 69,069 candidates had actually appeared in the said examination. It is also pertinent to note that the examination centre of none of the five petitioners herein was situated at Noida. Rather, upon inquiry, the Court is informed that the centre from where petitioner No.1 had sat for taking his examination was located at Rajouri Garden, that of petitioner No.2 was at JNU Centre, that of petitioner No.3 was at Vivek Vihar, that of petitioner No.4 was at Tagore Garden and that of petitioner No.5 was near Karkardooma Courts.
5. Merely an apprehension expressed by the petitioners that they would suffer irreparable loss and injury in the event of a scam, which scam is under investigation by the Crime Branch, Delhi Police, cannot be considered as sufficient ground for quashing the AIPGMEE-2012 held on 08.01.2012 for 69,069 candidates all over the country. When the magnitude of the aforesaid incident is still unknown and the investigations are on, the present petition can only be termed as one based on surmises and conjectures. As a result, the present petition is dismissed along with the pending application, as being premature and without any basis.
(HIMA KOHLI)JUDGE
FEBRUARY 10, 2012
********************************************************************************
कुछ आरोपों के कारण पूरी परीक्षा रद करना ठीक नहीं
(AIIMS : Due to some minor allegations/charges, It is not good to cancel entire Medical Examination)
Right To Education A Fundamental Right : Supreme Court
*****************
See also - Quality Education (Teacher Eligibility Test ) to implement RTE :
http://www.ncte-india.org/Norms/RTE-3.pdf
http://www.ncte-india.org/Norms/RTE-4.pdf
http://www.ncte-india.org/publicnotice/notice2011/Notification_qulifi_RTE_hindi_eng.pdf
http://www.ncte-india.org/Chairperson.pdf
http://www.ncte-india.org/pub/curr/curr.htm#214
http://www.ncte-india.org/appeal1/Orders%20of%202nd%20appeal%20meeting.pdf
*****************************************************************************
A bench comprising Chief Justice SH Kapadia and Justices KS
Radhakrishnan and Swantanter Kumar, which had reserved its verdict on
August 3 last year, upheld provisions of the law which made right to
education a fundamental right of children in the age group of 6-14
years.
The RTE Act will be applicable for day schools and not for boarding
schools. The RTE Act will also not be applicable in private minority
schools.
The order was passed on a bunch of petitions by private unaided
institutions which contended that the Act violates the rights of private
educational institutions under Article 19(1)(g) which provided autonomy
to private managements to run their institutions without governmental
interference.
The Centre had defended the law saying it was aimed at uplifting the socially and economically weaker section of society.The Centre had emphasised the need to de-link merit and talent from
social and economic differences among different sections of society and
said that the act calls for "moving towards composite classrooms with
children from diverse backgrounds, rather than homogeneous and
exclusivist schools".
FAQs on the Right To Education
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court today has said Right To Education is
constitutionally valid and has made it clear that it will apply to all
schools controlled by govt or local bodies. Here are some FAQs on this
act.
What is the Right to Education Act?
All children between the ages of 6 and 14 shall have the right to free
and compulsory elementary education at a neighbourhood school. There is
no direct (school fees) or indirect cost (uniforms, textbooks, mid-day
meals, transportation) to be borne by the child or the parents to obtain
elementary education. The government will provide schooling
free-of-cost until a child's elementary education is completed.
What does this mean for schools across the country?
Right to Education Act, 2009, mandates 25 per cent free seats to the
poor in government aided and private unaided schools uniformly across
the country. However this will not be applicable to private minority
institutions that get no aid from the government. Government schools
will have no quota. These schools have to admit all. Schools will have to implement the 25% reservation at the entry level of the school. States will have to bear the cost of this.
How will the poor students be selected?
Poor students from neighbourhood areas have to be admitted, based on a lottery system.
What are problems with the Act and its implementation?
Many activists feel, that exempting private minority schools from
admitting poor students is the biggest drawback as many private schools
will exploit this. Bachpan Bachao Andolan, an NGO, conducted a study
across 9 states last year to understand the impact of the Right to
Education Act and discovered some disturbing trends.The names of a large
number of students were enrolled but they were not in schools. Bodies
which are to implement the Right to Education Act haven't even been set
up in many states.
What happens if the RTE is not implemented by schools?
The National Commission for the
Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) can review the safeguards for rights
provided under this Act, investigate complaints and have the powers of a
civil court in trying cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment