STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSHRI SHYAM LAL JOSHI AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

A               STATB OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC.
                                         v.                                        ,.,
               SHRI SHYAM LAL JOSHI AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

                              NOVEMBER 16, 1993

B           [M.N. VENlµTACHALIAH, CJ, S.C. AGRAWAL AND
                        .. DR. A.S. ANAND, JJ.)

           Service. Law--Rajasthan Education Subordinate Services Rules, 1971:
C       Primary School Teachers-Qualifications prescribed-Secondary with
  Basic School Training Certificates (BSTC) or equivalenHSTC Training in
  general subjects with crafts as one of the subject-National Training Certifi-
  cate (NTC) training only in crafts-National Trade Certificate recognised as
  equivalent-Derecognition of NTC on the ground of difference in the subject
  taught-NTC trainees-Whether could be appointed only as crafts teacher and
D not as general teacher.                ·

            The respondents Oled a writ petition before the High Court coun-
     tendiq that they had taken admission ... the NTC Course OD the basis or.
     tbe drcular dated August 6, 1984 Issued by the appellant State recognising
B tbe Na~onal Trade Certiftcate (NTC) as equivalent to B.S.T.C., but insplte
     of their having obtained the NTC they were not being appointed on the
     post of teachers In the Panchayat Samltles. They prayed for a direction to
     be Issued to the State Government to treat the NTC obtained by the
     petitioners as equivalent to B.S.T.C. for the purpose of appointment to the
  '. post or teachers In the .primary schools run by the Panchayat Samities In
F tbe appellant-State 'and for quashing orders dated January 7, 1985 and
     November 6, 1985 which stated that the candidates holding National Trade
     Certiftcates were not eligible for appointment to the posts of teachers in
     Panchayat Samitles and that service or the temporary teachers holding
     National Trade Certlftcates be terminated with immediate effect.
G          The ~t petition was allowed by a Single Judge who held that since
     recognition had been granted to the NTC Course as equivalent to the
     B.S.T.C. Course and persons acting upon that recognition had taken
     admission in NTC Course prior to the date of its derecognitlon, they could
     not be deprive~ from services and that the Government was estopped on
·H   the basis of the prindple or promissory estoppel to withdraw the recognl·"'
                                        682
                        STATEv. S.L.JOSHI                             683

tlon of the NTC and directed the appellant-State to treat the NTC obtained A
by the petitioners as equivalent to the B.S.T.C. for the purpose of appoint·
ment on the post of Teachers in the Primary Schools run by the Panchayat
Samities in Rajasthan.

     The Division Bench dismissed the Special appeal filed by the State.
                                                                            B
      Hence the appeal by the State.

       Jn the writ petitions filed before this Court, the petitioners sought
to claim the same relief as had been granted by the High Court. Some of
the writ petitioners did not have NTC or any other training qualification C
while some possessed B.Ed. qualifications.

      11ie appellant-State contended that the BSTC was a two years'
training course, covering various subjects whereas the N.T.C. was issued
after training in a particular craft, namely, the wood work, tailoring,
leather work and spinning and weaving; that NTC had been recognised as D
equivalent to B.S.T.C. for the purpose of appointment of teachers in
subjects relating to the craft for which the said certificate was issued; that
the training imparted for the said certificate was limited to the particular
craft and did not cover other fields; and that holder of NTC did not
poss.ess the requisite equipment to teach other subjects and, therefore, he E
could only be appointed as craft teacher and could not appointed as a
general teacher.          ·

      Disposing of the appeal and the Writ Petitions, this Court

      HELD : 1. A di~tinction ha~ to be dr3wn between a general teacher F
who has received complete training and is in a position to teach all the
subjects and a teacher who has received training in a particular craft and
can, therefore, properly teach • that particular craft only. Under the
relevant Rules for appointment on the post of Primary School Teacher it
is necessary to have B.S.T.C. or a training qualification recognised as
equivalent to B.S.T.C. or a training qualification recognised as equivalent G
to B.S.T.C. by the State Government. The B.S.T.C. course is a two years
training course wherein the training is given in various subjects. The NTC
is granted by the ITI after a course of training in a particular craft. By
order dated November 8, 1979, the State Government recognised the NTC
pen by ITI for teaching vocational subjects in Secondary Schools in· H
                                                                                    ( ,
    684                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1993) SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A certain specified crafts, namely, wood work, tailoring, leather work and
   spinning and weaving. This recognition is limited to teaching the aforesaid
   vocational subjects only. In the circular dated August 6, 1984, reference
   has been made to the order dated December 11,1974, whereby certificatr.s
   of Industrial Examinations of the State Government were recognised as
   equivalent to Arts and Handicrafts Examinations of Vidya Bhawan,
B Udaipur, and it was directed that since the Handicraft Diploma Certifi-
   cates ofVidya Bhawan have been recognised as equivalent to basic training
   (B.S.T.C.) by the Education Department, the Industrial Examination of
   the State Government bas also been treated as equivalent of to the B.S.T.C.
   The said circular does not run counter to the limited nature of recognition
C granted to the NTC by order dated Nov~mber 8, 1979. This was clarified
   by circular dated January 7; 1985 wherein it has been stated that the NTC
   bas ~n given recognitlt>n to teach Industrial subject in the secondary
   schools for'· conferring NTC and that candidates holding NTC are not
   eligible for the po1t of teachers In the Panchayat Samities. The last circular
D dated November 6, 1985 only gives effect to the directions contained In the
   earlier circular dated January 7, 1985. It would thus appear that limited
   recopltion was given to ·NTC by order dated November 8, 1979 in the
 , matter or teaching vocational subjects of the certificate and the subsequent
   clrc:ulan dated August 6, 1984, January 7, 1985 and November 6, 1985 do
   not detract from that position. The circular dated August 6, 1984 cannot
E be construed as givtn1 a fresh recognition to NTC and,· therefore, the
   question or withdrawal of recognition aranted earlier by the subsequent
   drculan dated January 7, 1985 and November 6, 1985 does not arise. The
   prlndple of promissory estoppel ls also not attracted.
                                                          [690·F·H & 691·A·E]
F         Surr1h Pal and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., (19871 2 sec 445,
    dl1tlnpi1hed.

          2, In view of the limited recopition that bas been granted to NTCs
    the holden of NTCs cannot claim appointment as 1eneral teachen and
O   can only be appointed on the post of craft teachers In the craft for wblch
    they hold the NTC. For teaching subjects other than the craft for which
    they bold the NTC the position or the holder of NTC Is no different from
    that of an untrained teacher. There ls need for appointment of properly
    trained teachers. '[691·F·G)

H         Andhra ~sari Educational Society v. Director of School Education·&
                  STATEv..S_.L.JOSHI [AGRAWAL,J.)                       685

Ors., [1988) Supp 3 SCR 893, relied upon.                                      A
        Ram Sukh v. State of Rajasthan, [1989) Supp. 2 SCC 189, referred
to.

      3. In the circumstances, all those persons who hold the National
Trade Certificates are eligible for appointment to the post of Craft Teacher   B
In the craft for which they hold the NTC and they can be appointed as
general teacher only after they have secured the prescribed training
qualification under the relevant rules. [692·E·G]

        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7031 of
1993.                                                                          c
     From the Judgment and Order dated 12.9.90 of the Rajasthan High
Court in D.B. Civil SA. No. 177of1990.
                                    WITH
                                                                               D
        Writ Petition (Civil) No. 122 of 1922 etc. etc.
        B.L. Panwar and G. Prakash for the Appellant/Petitioners.
        Gobinda Mukhoty and Mahabir Singh for the Respondents.
                                                                               E
        The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
        S.C. AGARWAL, J. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 3495of1991.

        Leave granted.

      This appeal and the connected Writ Petitions filed under Article 32      F
of the Constitution relate to appointment on the posts of Primary School
Teacher, in the State of Rajasthan..

      The said post of Primary School Teacher is included in the Rajasthan
Education Subordinate Service governed by Rajasthan Education Subor· G
dinate Service, Rules, 1971. In the schedule to the said Rules the post the
post of Primary School Teacher is placed in Grade-III and the qualifica·
tions prescribed for the appointment to said post arc :

          "Secondary with basic School Training Certificate (BSTC) or a
          training qualification recognised as equivalent to BSTC by State H
    686                     SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993) SUPP. 3 S.C.R..

A             Government."

        By order dated December 11, 1974, the State Government recog-
  nised the Certificates of Industrial Examin"1tions of the Rajasthan Govern-
  ment its equivalent to the Art and Handicraft Examinations of Vidya
  Bhaw~n, Udaipur. With regard to recognition of National Trade Certifi-
B cates (NTC) given by the Industrial Training Institute (ITI) a separate
  order was passed on November 8, 1979 whereby the State Government
  ga~e recognition to such certificates for teaching vocational subjects, viz.,
  Wood Work, Tailoring, Leather Work and Spinning and Weaving iii the
  Secondary Schools. The Director and Special Secretary to the Government
C of Rajasthan, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, issued
  a circular dated August 6, 1984 wherein, after referring to the order dated
  Dece~ber 11, 1974, it was stated :


              ".......The Handicraft Diploma Certificates of Vidya Bhavan Hand-
              icraft Institute, Udaipur has been recognised as equi-.:alent to basic
D             training (BSTC) by the Education Department since the commen-
              cement of the training by the Government for appointment and
              promotion. In this way the industrial Examination of the State
              Government has also been treated as equivalent to B.S:T.C.

E                Therefore, those who have got ~e aforementioned training
              should also be treated equivalent to B.S.T.C"

          On January 7, 1985, the Director and Special· Secretary to the
    Government.of Rajasthan, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Depart-
    ment, issued a circular wherein, after referring to the clarification made by
F   the Direct.or, Primary and Secondary Education that "there is difference in
    the syllabus of the training of B.S.T.C. and N.T.C.", it was stated :      .
              11
                ......... N.T.C. has been: recognised only to teach the Industry subject

               and the Government of Rajastrum has given recognition to m to
               teach Industry subject in the Secondary Schools for conferring
G              National Trade Certificates, Hence candidates holding National
     ·• .    . Trade Certificate are not eligible to the post of Teachers in the
               Panchayat Samittees......"

            On November 6, 1985 the Director and Special Secretary to the
H Government of Rajasthan, ·Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Depart-
                STATEv. S.L.JOSHI (AGRAWAL,J.)                       687

ment, issued the following circular :                                      A
        "...........All Development Officers

            Sub : In connection With non-eligibility of National Trade
        Certificate holding candidates conferred by ITI for appointment
        to the Post of Teachers in Panchayat Samittees.                     B
            It has come to the notice of the State Government that the
        candidates who have undergone National Trade Certificate train-
        ing have been appointed to the posts of Teachers in the Panchayat
        Samittees. In connection with the recognition of National Trade
        Certificate this Department has issued one Circular No: F. 138 C
        (15-42) VDP/Admn.-111/ Education/81-74 dated 7.1.85 by which it
        has been made clear that the candidates holding Natiol;Ull Trade
        Certificates are not eligible for appointment to the posts 9f
        Teachers in the Panchayat Samittces. In spite of having issued clear
        cut directions such Diploma Samittecs temporarily.                   D
           Therefore, it is directed that the services of the temporary
        teachers ho1ding National Trade Certificates be terminated with
        immediate effect and this Department be informed.•

      The respondents in the appeal who had filed the writ petition in·thc E
High Court (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) have obtained NTC
from the Industrial Training Institute. Their ~c is that they had taken
admission in the NTC Course on the basis of the circular dated August 6,
1984 recognising the National Trade Certificate a equivalent to B.S.T.C.
They approached the High Court with the grievance that in spite of their
having obtainCd the NTC they arc not being appointed on the post of F
teachers in the Panchayat Samitics and they prayed that the State Govcm·
ment be directed to treat the NTC obtained by the petitioners as equivalent
to B.S.T.C. for the purpose of appointment to the post of teachers in the
primary schools run by the Panchayat Samitics in the State of Rajasthan
and for quashirig of orders dated January 7, 1985 and November 6, 1985. G
The said writ petition was allowed by a learned Single Judge by his
judgment dated January 12, 1990. The learned Single Judge held that since
recognition had been granted to the NTC Course as equivalent to the
B.S.T.C. Course and persons acting upon that recognition have taken
admission in NTC Course prior to the date of its dcrecognition, they cannot
be deprived from services and that the Govcmmcnt was cstoppcd on the H
    688                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993) SUPP. 3 S.C.R.;

A basis of the principle of promissory estoppel to withdraw the recognitien
    of the NTC. The learned Single Judge has directed the appellant to treat
    the NTC obtained by the petitioners as equivalent to the B.S.T.C. for the
    purpose of appointment on the post of Teachers in the Primary Schools
    run by the Panchayat Samities in Rajasthan. The learned Single Judge has,
    in this connection, placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Suresh
B   Pal and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Other, (1987) 2 SCC 445. The Special
    appeal filed by the appellant State against the said decision of the learned
    Single Judge was dismissed by the Division Bench of High Court by order
    dated September 12, 1990. This appeal is directed against the said decision
    of the Division Bench of the High Court.                  ·
c          In the Writ Petitions that have been filed under Article 32 of the
    Constitution, the petitioners are seeking to claim the same relief as has
    been granted by the High Court. It may, however, be stated that in some
    of the Writ petitions there .are petitioners who do not have NTC or any
    other training qualification while in some cases there are petitioners pos-
D   sessing B.Ed. qualifications. Having regard to the submission urged by the
    learned Counsel for the petitioners the Writ Petitions have been con-
    sidered only in respect of the petitioners who are having the NTC like the
    petitioners in the appeal.

           On behalf of the State it has been pointed out that B.S.T.C. Course
E   is a two years training course covering the following subjects :

          /ST YEAR

          A. Principles of Education and Education in Modern India.

F         B. Educational Psychology

          C. Optional Subjects (one of the following)

          i) Pre-Primary School Education Training

G         ii) Population Education Teaching

          iii). Unformal Education and Adult Education

          iv) Education for Children of Special_ Category

H         D. Mother Tongue - Hindi, Urdu, Sindhi, Gujarati, Punjabi.
               STATEv. S.L.JOSHI (AGRAWAL,J.)                        689

     E. Mathematics - Subject matter and teaching methodology.             A
     F. Environmental Study and teaching methodology.

     G. Health Education and Physical Education.

      H. School Utility and Productive Works/Work Experience and Social    B
Service - Subject matter and teaching methodology.

     PRACTICAL PAPERS :

     A. Physical Education

     B. Social Utility and Productive Works
                                                                           c
     C. Art Education

     D. Moral Education

     IINO YEAR                                                             D

     A. School (Institution) Administration and Health Education.

     B. Mother Tongue - Subject matter and teaching methodology
(Hindi, Urdu, Sindhi, Gujarati, Punjabi).
                                                                           E
     C. English : Subject matter and teaching methodology.

     D. Third language : Subject matter teaching methodology (Sanskrit
Urdu, Sindhi, Gujarati, Punjabi).

     E. Mathematics : Subject matter and teaching methodology.             F
     F. Social Science : Subjec:t matter and teaching methodology.

     G. Science : Subject matter and teaching methodology.

     H. Art: Subject matter and teaching methodology.                      G
     I. Practical exercise teaching planning (Ilnd year). /

     PRACTICAL PAPERS

     A. Physical Education                                                 H
    690                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A          B. Social Utility and Productive Work

           C. Art Education ·

           D. Moral Education

B          It has also been submitted that students who undergo primary and
    middle education undertake the study of Hindi, English Mathematics,
    General Science, Social Science including Geography, Sanskrit, Com-
    merce/Home Science/Drawing, Craft and Physical Training. It has been
    point~ out that Craft is only ·one of the various subjects which are taught
    to the students. It has also been submitted that the NTC is issued after
c   training in a particular craft, namely, the wood work, tailoring, leather work
    and spinning & weaving. It has been urged that NTC has been recognised
    as ·eq~valent to B.S,T.C fpr the purpose of appointment of teachers in
  . sUb)fscts"relatmg to  the  craft for which the said certifi.Ca.te ·~ iss~ed. The
    training imparted for the said certificate is limited to the particular craft
D and does not cover other fields. The holder NTC does not possess the
    requisite equipment to teach other subjects and, therefore, he can only be
    appointed as craft teacher and cannot be appointed as a general teacher.
    Reliance has been placed on the order of the State Government dated
    November 8, 1979 relating to recognition of NTC and it ha.~ been urged
E that the· Ckcular dated August 6, 1984 does not in any way modify the
    limited nature of recognition granted to NTC in order dated November· 8,
    1979 and that the circulars dated January 7, 1985 and November 6, 1985
  - only clarify the positiqn.

           In our opinion, these contentions urged on behalf of the State must
p   be accepted. A distinction has to be drawn between a general teacher who
    has received complete training and is in a position to teach all the subjects
    and a teacher who has received training in a particular craft and can,
    therefore, properly teach that particular craft only. Under the relevant
    Rules for appointment on the post of Primary School Teacher it is neces-
    sary to have B.S.T.C or a training qualificatio~ recognised as equivalent to
G   B.S.T.C. by the State Government. The B.S.T.C Course is a two years
    training course wherein the training is given in various subjects. The NTC
    is granted by the ITI after ·a course of training in a particular craft. By
    order dated November 8, 1979, the State Government recognised the NTC
    given by ITI for teaching vocational subjects in Se,condary Schools in
H   certain specified crafts, namely, wood work, tailoring, leather work and
                STATEv. S.L.JOSHI [AGRAWAL,J.)                            691

spinning & weaving. This recognition is limited to teaching the aforesaid A
vocational subjects only. In the circular dated August 6, 1984, reference
has been made to the order dated December 11, 1974, whereby certificates
of Industrial Examinations of the Rajasthan Government were recognised
as equivalent to Arts and Handicraft Examinations of Vidya Bhawan,
Udaipur, and it was directed that since the Handicraft Diploma Certifi-
                                                                             B_ -
cates of Vidya B'iawan have been recognised as equivalent to basic training
(B.S.T.C.) by the Education Department; the Industrial Examination of the
State Government has also been treated as equivalent to B.S.T.C The said -
ciicular does not run counter to the limited nature of recognition granted
to NT~ by order dated November 8, 1979. This was clarified by circular·
dated January 7, 1985 wherein it has been stated that the NTC has been C
given recognition to teach Industrial subject in the secondary schools for
conferring NTC and that candidates hol<ling NTC are not eligible for the
post 'of tea~hers in the Panchayat Samities. The last circular dated Novem-
ber 6, 1985 only gives effect to the directions contained in the earli~r
circular dated January 7, 1985. It would thus appear that limited recogni- · D
tion was given to NTC by order dated November 8, 1979 in the matter of
teaching vocational subjects of the certificate and the subsequent circulars
dated August, 6, 1984, January 7, 1985 and November 6, 1985 do not
detract from that position. The circular dated August 6, 1984 cannot be
construed as giving a fresh recognition to NTC and, therefore, the question
of withdrawal of recognition granted earlier by the subsequent circulars E.
dated January 7, 1985 and November 6, 1985 does not arise. The principle
of promissory estoppel is not attracted and the decision of this Court in
Suresh Pal & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors. , (supra), on which reliance
has been placed by the High Court, also has no application.
                                                                                 F
       In view of the limited recognition that has been granted to NTCs the
holders of NTCs cannot claim appointment as general Teachers and can
only .be appointed on the post of craft teachers in the craft for which they
hold the NTC. For teaching subjects other than the craf\ for which they
hold the NTC the position of the holder of NTC is no different from that .
of an untrained teacher The need for appointment of properly trained G
teachers has been emphasised by this Court in Andhra Kesari Educational
Society v. Director of School Education & Ors., [1988] Supp 3 SCR 893,
wherein it has been observed :

        "......It is, .therefore, needless to state that subjected to teachers   H
    692                      SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A              should be subjected to rigorous training with rigid scrutiny of
               dliciency. It has greater relc\'ance lo the needs of the <lay. The ill
               trained or sub-standard teachers would be detrimental lo our
               educational system; if not a punishment on our children."

          Inthe context of appointment of primary School teachers this Court
B   in Ram Sukll v. State of Rajasthan, (1989) Suppl. II SCC 189, has laid down:

               ".............We are not less sympathetic to the petitioners who are out
               of job but we cannot forget the welfare of those who are not before
               the court. They are the tiny tots who require proper handling by
c              well trained teachers."

               "..............The primary school teachers are of utmost importance in
               developing a child's personality in the formative years. It is not just
               enough to teach the child alphabets and figures, but much more
               is required to understand child psychology and aptitudes. They
D              need a different approach altogether. Only trained teachers c:ould
               lead them properly. The untrained ,teachers can never be proper
               substitute to trained teachers."

          The Judgment of the High Court cannot, therefore, be sustained and
E   must be set aside and the Writ Petition filed by the petitioners in High
    Court is disposed with the direction that the petitioners, as holders of NTC,
    are eligible for appointment to the post of Craft Teacher in the Craft for
    which they hold the NTC and they can be appointed as general teacher
    only after they have secured the prescribed training qualification under the
    relevant rules.
F
          Similarly by in the Writ Petitions that have been filed under Article
    32 of the Constitution, the only relief that can be granted to the petitioners
    who hold NTC is that they are eligible for appointment to the post of Craft
    Teacher in the. craft for which they hold such certificate and they can be
G   appointed as general teachers only after they have secured the prescribed
    training qualification under the relevant rules.

          It is, however, made clear that in the event of the Petitioners in the
    Writ Petitions filed in this Court as well as the Petition7rs in .the Writ
    Petition filed in High Court obtaining the necessary trainmg qualification
H   prescribed under the Rules, they become entitled to be considered for
                STATEv. S.L.JOSHI [AGRAWAL,J.)                           693

appointment to the post of general teachers and if they apply for such          A
appointment the restriction regarding the maximum age for such appoint-
ment may be relaxed provided they obtain the necessary training qualifica-
tion within a period of three years from the date of this judgment.

       The appeal is, accordingly, allowed, the judgment and order of
learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court dated January 12, 1990         B
as well as the order dated September 12, 1990 passed by the Division Bench
of said High Court are set aside and the Civil Writ Petition No. 1614 of
1990 filed in the High Court of Rajasthan as well as the Writ Petitions filed
uncier Article 32 of the Constitution in this Court are disposed of in the
light of the directions aforementioned. No order as to costs.
                                                                                c
N.P.V.                                                 Appe~ disposed of.