https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314079 Rule 8 of the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 prescribed B.T.C. training as the normal qualification, but the State had relaxed that requirement when sufficient B.T.C. candidates were unavailable. The Court held that once B.Ed. and L.T. candidates were treated as eligible on that basis, the policy could not be confined only to hill districts without a rational basis for territorial classification. B.Ed. and B.T.C. remained different qualifications, yet the Government could consider B.Ed./L.T. candidates wherever B.T.C. candidates were insufficient. The district-wise restriction was therefore unjustified, and the same eligibility principle had to operate uniformly throughout the State. en-us Thu, 24 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 May 2024 12:18:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314079 Rule 8 of the U.P. Basic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 prescribed B.T.C. training as the normal qualification, but the State had relaxed that requirement when sufficient B.T.C. candidates were unavailable. The Court held that once B.Ed. and L.T. candidates were treated as eligible on that basis, the policy could not be confined only to hill districts without a rational basis for territorial classification. B.Ed. and B.T.C. remained different qualifications, yet the Government could consider B.Ed./L.T. candidates wherever B.T.C. candidates were insufficient. The district-wise restriction was therefore unjustified, and the same eligibility principle had to operate uniformly throughout the State. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 24 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314079