Read Time: 08 minutes

Allahabad High Court recently clarified that under no circumstances a person holding a B.P.Ed (Bachelor of Physical Education) degree can work as an assistant teacher in a government-aided primary school.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh was hearing a petition that challenged an order by District Inspector of Schools (DIOS), Gonda upholding the management committee’s decision to terminate petitioner’s services as Assistant Teacher in the attached primary school of the Vivekanand Inter College, Gonda on the ground that he did not possess the requisite qualification for appointment.

The Court held that it “cannot substitute the statutory qualification, which is not otherwise provided under the relevant provisions”.

As per the sub-section (2) of Section 16 of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, the qualification of Assistant Teacher in attached primary section of an Intermediate College is graduation plus C.T. (Teacher's Certificate), B.T.C.(Basic Training Certificate) /H.T.C. (Higher Teachers' Certificate) (or equivalent qualification, but in case of non-availability of person with BTC qualification, person with B.Ed. (Bachelor of Education) degree qualification would be appointed. There is no mention of the B.P.Ed. degree as one of the alternate qualifications.

The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar was appointed on the post of Assistant Teachers in the primary section of the said school in 2010, however, the DIOS, Gonda disapproved his selection. However, following a litigation chain in the High Court, in 2012 DIOS approved Rakesh’s payment with the condition that if any relevant facts/adverse material would come to the notice in future to his selection, his salary would be cancelled.

During a inquiry, later on, it came to light in 2013, that Rakesh, having only a B.P.Ed degree was appointed for the post, despite candidates with B.Ed. degree had also applied.

Resultantly, the committee of management passed an order in 2014 terminating Rakesh’s service and forwarded the papers to the office of the District Inspector of Schools for approval. Who, subsequently, approved the same.

In his plea before the High Court, Rakesh's counsel had argued that training qualification B.P.Ed. is equivalent qualification to B.Ed., L.T., B.T./C.T. and B.P.Ed. is covered by phrase “equivalent qualification” as provided under sub-section (2) of Section 16 of the Act, 1921.

He had, therefore, said that the ground on which the petitioner’s services were terminated is wholly incorrect and is liable to be set aside.

On the other hand, counsel for the opposite parties had submitted that as per the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 16 of the Act, 1921, the Assistant Teacher in the primary section, where the Teachers are receiving the salary under the provisions of the Act, 1971 are to be appointed through direct recruitment.

Also, he had pointed that B.P.Ed. is a training for imparting physical education, which is being imparted at the High School and Intermediate level.

Considering the submission of both the parties, court noted that in primary section, the children study in Class-I to Class-V and, therefore, the Teachers require such training to teach students of these classes.

The court said, “The Legislature in its wisdom, has prescribed the qualification for appointment of Assistant Teacher in the attached primary school, which does not include B.P.Ed. degree.”

Court reiterated a Full Bench judgment of Allahabad High Court that “teacher's Training imparted to teachers for B.Ed. course equips them for teaching higher classes, whereas the Basic Teaching Certificate (BTC) is given to teachers for teaching small children and the two cannot be compared with. The duration of courses of B.T.C. and L.T./B.Ed. are entirely different and have been devised keeping in view the stages through which the students pass.”

Therefore, noting that B.P.Ed. degree is not an alternate qualification prescribed for B.T.C. etc., court dismissed the present petition holding that the petitioner lacked essential qualification and DIOS decision was nowhere at fault.

Case Title: Rakesh Kumar v. - State Of U.P Thru Secy Secondary Edu Lko & Ors