ஆசிரியர் தகுதித்தேர்வு விடைகளுக்கு எதிராக தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்கில் மதுரை உயர்நீதிமன்றம் அளித்த தீர்ப்பின் நகல் வெளியீடு.

2013 ஆகஸ்டில் நடைபெற்ற ஆசிரியர் தகுதித்தேர்வு விடைகளுக்கு எதிராக தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்கில் மதுரை உயர்நீதிமன்றம் அளித்த தீர்ப்பின் நகல் இதோ கல்விச்செய்தி நண்பர்களுக்காக...

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 13.11.2013


CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU

W.P.(MD)No.18223 of 2013
W.P.(MD)No.18224 and 18225 & 18286 of 2013
and
M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2013 in W.P(MD)No.18223 of 2013
and
M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2013 in W.P(MD)No.18224 of 2013
and
M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2013 in W.P(MD).No.18225 of 2013

W.P.(MD).Nos.18223 to 18225 of 2013

N.Kalai Selvi .. Petitioner in
W.P.(MD).No.18223/2013

K.Dhanaa .. Petitioner in
W.P.(MD).No.18224/2013

A.Jegan Selvaraj .. Petitioner in
W.P.(MD).No.18225/2013

Vs www.kalviseithi.net

1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort St. George, Chennai -09.

2.The Secretary,
Teachers Recruitment Board,
EVK Sampath Maaligai,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai - 06. .. Respondents in
all the petitions


Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.18223 of 2013

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Declaration, to declare that the final key
answer provided for the question paper in TNTET-1 (Paper-I), Booklet Series-A,
pertaining to question Nos.3, 27, and 71, provided by the respondent No.2, as
incorrect and accordingly, direct the respondent No.2 to award three more marks
in addition to the marks secured by the petitioner, i.e., 89 out of 150 and to
declare the petitioner bearing Roll No.13TE20102683 to have passed in TNTET
Paper-I, 2013, within a stipulated time.

Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.18224 of 2013

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Declaration, to declare that the final key
answer provided for the question paper in TNTET-1 (Paper-I), Booklet Series-D,
pertaining to question Nos.17, 18, 22 and 66, provided by the respondent No.2,
as incorrect and accordingly direct the respondent No.2 to award four more marks
in addition to the marks secured by the petitioner, i.e., 88 out of 150 and to
declare the petitioner bearing Roll No.13TE16101069 to have passed in TNTET
Paper-I, 2013, within a stipulated time.

Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.18225 of 2013

www.kalviseithi.net

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Declaration, to declare that the final key
answer provided for the question paper in TNTET-1 (Paper-II), Booklet Series-D,
pertaining to question Nos.3, 4, 27, and 105, provided by the respondent No.2,
as incorrect and accordingly direct the respondent No.2 to award four more marks
in addition to the marks secured by the petitioner, i.e., 88 out of 150 and to
declare the petitioner bearing Roll No.13TE20204799 to have passed in TNTET
Paper-II, 2013, within a stipulated time.

!For Petitioners in
all these petitions ... Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy

^For respondents in
all these petitions ... Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
Special Government Pleader


W.P.(MD).No.18286 of 2013

M.Kathiravan .. Petitioner


vs www.kalviseithi.net


The Teachers Recruitment Board,
rep. by its Chairman / Member
Secretary, D.P.I. Campus,
College Road,
Chennai- 600 006. .. Respondent


Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to award
one mark for each of the question Nos.7, 8, 17 and 62 in TET Paper - I
examination conducted by the respondent on 17.08.2013 as Tamil Nadu Teacher
Eligibility Test (TNTET) - 2013 and consequently direct the respondent to issue
a certificate mentioning the petitioner as "Pass" in the above said test.

For Petitioner ... Mr.Thirunavukkarasu
for Mr.K.M.Senthil Vinayagam

For respondent ... Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
Special Government Pleader


:COMMON ORDER

The petitioners in all these petitions have appeared for the Tamil Nadu
Teacher Eligibility Test (TNTET) - 2013. It consists of two papers. The
tentative key answers for the said papers were published by the respondent Board
on 22.08.2013. The objections were submitted by the petitioners and few others,
on various dates. The same were considered by the experts body, constituted by
the Board and based on the opinion of the experts, final key answers were
published on 05.11.2013 and results were also published. While so, the
petitioners have come up with these writ petitions challenging the key answers
relating to certain questions.

W.P.(MD).No.18223 of 2013

2.The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged the key answers,
relating to the question Nos.3, 27 and 71 in Paper-I "A" series booklet.

3. Question No.3 reads as follows;
"xGf;f tsh;r;rpapy; Kf;fpa gA;F tfpg;gJ
A) kdg;ghd;ik B) kdrhl;rp
C) kdj;jpwd; D) vz;zA;fs;
"Main role in moral development is
A)Attitude B)Conscience
C)Mental Ability D)Feelings"

4.The key answer is option "A" (Attitude). According to the petitioner,
option "B" (Conscience) is the correct answer. In order to substantiate his
contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a textbook
issued by the Government for the First year - Diploma in Education Course. In
the said book, in page No.100, it is stated as follows;

""xGf;f elj;ijapy; kdr;rhl;rp (Conscience) vd;Dk; cs;Szh;t[ nd;wpaikahg;
gA;fpidg; bgw;Ws;sjhFk";"

5. Referring to the above version, the learned counsel for the petitioner
would submit that option "B" is the correct answer. But, the learned Special
Government Pleader would submit that in order to examine the said issue, a body
of experts, consisting of Mrs.N.Valarmathi, Lecturer, DIET, Ranipet, Vellore
District, Ms.S.Arumbumozhi, Lecturer, DIET, Kaliyampoondi,Kancheepuram District,
Mrs.I.R.Carmeline, Lecturer, DIET, Chennai and Mrs.N.Punithavathi, Lecturer,
DIET, Chennai, was constituted. The experts have opined that "Conscience" took
important role in moral behaviour only.

6. I have considered the above submissions.

7. The statement in the textbook, which relied on by the learned counsel
for the petitioner, speaks of moral behaviour (xGf;f elj;ij) only. Thus, in the
matter of moral behaviour, 'conscience' place a vital role. But, the question
relates to moral development. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner is not
acceptable and therefore, the same is rejected.

8.The next question is question No.27 in paper-I "A" series booklet. This
question reads as follows;
"Physical growth in children is at the maximum rate at the age of
A)0-2 years B)2-6 years
C)6-12 years D)12-19 years"

9.The key answer is option "A". According to the petitioner, the correct
answer is option "D". In order to substantiate his contention, the petitioner
has relied on the textbook prescribed for the first year of Diploma in Education
Course. In page 2 of the said book, it is stated as follows;

"gs;spg; gUtk; Kjy; Fkug; gUtk; bjhlA;Fk; tiu FHe;ijapd; cly; tsh;r;rp
Bjf;f epiyia milfpd;wJ. mjidj;bjhlh;e;J Fkug;gUtj;jpy; cly; tsh;r;rpapy; mjpf
Btfk; fhzg;gLfpwJ."

10. Relying on this, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that option "D" is the correct answer. But, the learned Special Government
Pleader would submit that after receiving objections, this question was examined
by the very same experts. They have opined that option "A" is the correct
answer. For that, they have referred to as many as four standard textbooks.

11.I have considered the above submissions.

12. In the textbook, upon which the reliance is made by the petitioner, a
graph is given at page-2, showing the growth of the child. Even to naked eyes
the growth shows that upto 2 years, the child achieves 20 units of growth,
whereas during the second phase viz., on completion of 6 years of age, the child
grows upto 40 units. It is made clear that during the initial period of two
years, the child achieves 20 units of height, whereas to achieve further 20
units, it took four years. The graph further shows that at the age of 12, the
child achieve 60 units of growth, whereas on completion of 20 years, the child
reaches 100 units. Thus, between 12 to 20 years of age, the child achieves only
40 units of height. This rate of growth is achieved in 8 years. Thus, it is
crystal clear that even as per the graph, which c