The Calcutta High Court has ordered the Board of Primary Education to interview four litigants who secured passing marks through allotted marks for incorrect questions in the 2014 Tate examination. The decision highlights the court’s commitment to addressing fairness in the education sector and ensuring opportunities for deserving candidates.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
KOLKATA: On Friday, the Calcutta High Court, under the guidance of Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, has issued a directive to the Board of Primary Education, mandating the interview of four petitioners for the appointment of primary teachers. This order comes initiated by the four petitioners who, despite giving the TET in 2014, did not pass initially. It was later revealed that they had obtained passing marks by virtue of allotted marks for incorrect questions, yet they allegedly did not receive a call for the interview.
Sudipta Dasgupta and Firdous Shamim, the legal representatives of the litigants, highlighted a crucial aspect of the case. The four litigants had undergone primary teacher education training (D EL ED) before 2016. According to the lawyers, if these candidates had passed the examination after receiving allotted marks for the erroneously framed questions, they would have undoubtedly secured the teaching positions. This optimism stems from the fact that there were only about 49 thousand vacancies, and there were 11 thousand trained candidates competing for these positions.
This case had emerged concerning incorrect questions in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) exam. Following a protracted, it was established that certain questions were indeed flawed, leading to the allocation of marks for those questions to all candidates. Consequently, many aspirants passed the TET solely by benefiting from the allotted marks. As per the lawyers representing the litigants, those who successfully cleared the TET under these circumstances should be considered eligible for an interview.
This development sheds light on the intricate challenges faced by candidates in the education sector, where the fairness and accuracy of examination questions become crucial determinants of a candidate’s success. The court’s intervention underscores the importance of rectifying discrepancies and ensuring that deserving candidates are not unfairly excluded from opportunities based on procedural irregularities.
The Calcutta High Court‘s decision to direct the Board of Primary Education to interview the four petitioners, who obtained passing marks through allotted marks for incorrect questions.
