SOM KRISHAN vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

1
2026:HHC:48731

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.6967 of 2025
Date of decision: 04.11.2026
Som Krishan …..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others …..Respondents
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Jaswal, Judge.
1
Whether approved for reporting? Yes
For the Petitioner : Mr.Naresh Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General
with Mr. Pushpender Jaswal,
Additional Advocate General for
respondents No. 1 & 2.
Ms. Shivani, Advocate vice
Mr.Chander Shekhar, Advocate, for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate, for
respondent No.4.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia,
prayed for the following reliefs:-
“A. The respondents No.1-2 may kindly be directed to
amend the Rule 7 of Recruitment and Promotion Rules
notified vide notification dated 10.10.2024 by incorporating
the qualification of Post Graduation in addition to
qualification already prescribed therein, strictly as per the
notification dated 13.11.2019 issued by NCTE for the
consideration for the post of Special Educator.
1
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes

2
2026:HHC:48731
B. That the impugned condition No.3 (Six months
training of teacher in cross disability area in inclusive
education) imposed by respondent No.3 for appearing in
Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) in prospectus may kindly be
quashed and set aside being contrary to the R & P Rules.
C. The respondent No.3 may kindly be directed to permit the
petitioner to appear in the TET Examination for Special
Educator.”
2. The petitioner has assailed Recruitment and Promotion
Rules, framed by the respondent-Department on 10.10.2024 i.e.
H.P. Elementary Education Department, Special Educator (for
Class-VI to Class-XII), Group-C (Non-Gazetted) Recruitment &
Promotion Rules (hereinafter referred to as “2024 Rules”). In terms
of the 2024 Rules, the post of Special Educator (for Class-VI to
Class-XII) is to be filled in by way of Direct Recruitment 100% from
amongst candidates who possess the educational qualifications
mentioned in Column No.7 thereof, one of which essential
qualification is not possessed by the petitioner. To be more precise,
in terms of Clause 7 of the 2024 Rules, the essential qualifications to
be eligible to participate in the process of appointment to the post of
Special Educator are as under:
“7. Educational
Qualifications:
(a) Essential qualification:-
(I) Graduation in any stream from a
recognized University with at least
50% marks.
(ii) Bachelor of Education Degree
(Special Education) from a
Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI)
approved institution possess a valid
RCI & CRR number.
OR
B.Ed. With a recognized qualification
(Certificate/Diploma) from a

3
2026:HHC:48731
Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI)
approved institution possess a valid
RCI & CRR number.
(iii) Six-month training of teaching in
cross disability area in inclusive
education()

AND
(iv) Pass in Teacher Eligibility Test
(TET) duly conducted by H.P. Board
of School Education Dharmashala,
District Kangra or any other Agency
authorized by the Government.
() If the proposed programme
(cross disability top up courses being
developed by RCI as on in service
training is not available same may be
dropped from the qualification with a
condition that those recruited with
D.Ed./B.ED. Special Education have
to compulsory undergo aforesaid
training as soon as same is
conducted.”
As per the 2024 Rules, the candidate should inter alia be a Graduate
in any stream from a recognized University with at least 50% marks.
The petitioner herein though is possessing the other qualifications
mentioned in the said Column No.7, however, in his Graduation, he
has not secured at least 50% marks.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the
light of the fact that as per Annexure P-3, which is a notification
issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) dated
13.11.2019 under Section 23(1) of the Right of Children to Free and
Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the condition of 50% marks in
Graduation is coupled with the condition of 50% marks either in

4
2026:HHC:48731
Graduation or Post-Graduation, as the petitioner has done Post-
Graduation and was having more than 50% marks in Post-
Graduation, therefore, the non-amendment of the 2024 Rules by the
respondent-State to incorporate therein minimum qualification of
Post-graduation also therein is bad in law.
4. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the said
notification as the National Council for Teacher Education has
amended the condition of 50% marks in Graduation by adding that
50% marks can either be in Graduation or Post-Graduation, the act
of the respondents of not incorporating the said condition in the
Recruitment and Promotion Rules is causing hardship to the
petitioner. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that
the respondents be directed to carry out the said amendment in the
relevant Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Special
Educators issued vide notification dated 13.11.2019.
5. Learned counsel also submitted that as at the time
when the petitioner did his Graduation obtained other qualifications,
a Graduate with 45% marks was eligible for being appointed as
Special Educator, therefore, his suitability for appointment has to be
seen as per the Rules prevailing at that time.
6. No other point was urged.
7. On the other hand, learned Advocate General referred
to reply filed by the respondent-State and submitted that present

5
2026:HHC:48731
writ petition is totally misconceived. He took the Court to the
preliminary submissions made in the reply filed by the State and
submitted that the notification of the NCTE being relied upon by the
learned counsel for the petitioner does not relate to a Special
Educator. He submitted that in light of the contents of the said
notification, which deals with teachers other than Special Educators,
the petitioner cannot maintain the petition against the respondents to
amend the Recruitment and Promotion rules relating to the
appointment of Special Educators by referring to the notification
issued by NCTE which does not relate to Special Educators.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having
carefully gone through the pleadings as also documents appended
with the same, we are of the considered view that the present
petition indeed is misconceived.
9. The educational qualifications prescribed in the
Recruitment and Promotion Rules for appointment to the post of
Special Educator from pre-primary to Class-V demonstrate that for
said post, a candidate is required to have passed 10+2 from
recognized Board with at least 50% marks or Graduation in any
stream from a recognized University. Herein, Rules are clear that if a
candidate applying for the post was only 10+2 pass, then he should
have at least 50% marks in 10+2, but in case, he was a Graduate,

6
2026:HHC:48731
then the condition of possessing 50% marks was not there. These
rules are on record in terms of notification dated 10.10.2024 itself.
10. When it comes to the other Notification of the even date
issued by the Department, which relates to the post of Special
Educator itself but for Class-VI to Class-XII i.e. the impugned
Notification therein, the minimum educational qualifications
prescribed is Graduation in any stream from a recognized University
with at least 50% marks and other qualifications mentioned therein.
11. This means that the Employer/Department was aware
of its necessities and requirements and the kind of qualifications
which a candidate should possess while applying for the post of
Special Educator, be it for classes pre-primary to Class-V or
Classes-VI to Class-XII.
12. Whereas, in the Rules relating to appointment to the
post of Special Educator for pre- primary to Class-V, the minimum
qualification of 10+2 prescribed is with 50% marks or Graduation
without any embargo of 50% marks, but for Special Educator for
Class-VI to Class-XII, the minimum qualification is Graduation with
at least 50% marks.
13. Herein, it is not the case of the petitioner that besides
the essential qualification of Graduation with at least 50% marks,
other qualifications which have been prescribed by the Department
are totally alien to the post of Special Educator. In fact, there is no

7
2026:HHC:48731
dispute that as far as the other qualifications are concerned, they
have been prescribed in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules
taking into consideration the post, to which the appointment is to be
made as per the Right to Education Act.
14. In this backdrop, in light of the fact that it is the domain
of the employer as to what should be the Recruitment and
Promotion Rules and what should be the conditions therein including
qualifications, according to us, the inclusion of qualification of
Graduation with at least 50% marks is not such a condition which
can be termed as arbitrary and Unconstitutional so as to call for
interference by us. Simply because the petitioner does not possess
50% marks in Graduation, the same does not mean that the Rules
are or condition is ultra vires .
15. Now, coming to the relief prayed for by the petitioner
that a mandamus be issued to the respondents that the 2024 Rules
be amended as per notification dated 13.11.2019 issued by NCTE,
we find force in the submission made by the learned Advocate
General that the NCTE notification being relied upon by the
petitioner does not relate to the post of Special Educator. That being
the case, the petitioner cannot place any reliance on the said
instructions.
16. In fact, when this case was listed on 15.10.2026, we
had passed the following order:-

8
2026:HHC:48731
“Heard further. In our considered view, more so in
light of the reply that has been filed to the writ petition by the
State, the reliance of the petitioner upon notification dated
13.11.2019 (Annexure P-3), is of no assistance to the
petitioner, because, prima facie, this notification does not
deal with the post of a Special Educator. In terms of the
Recruitment and Promotion Rules dated 10.10.2024 framed
qua the post of Special Educator, as the minimum
qualification required is Graduation in any stream from a
recognized University with at least 50% marks and the
petitioner is not possessing a Graduation decree with 50%
marks, he is not eligible for being considered for appointment
against the post of Special Educator.
Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the hearing of this case be deferred
by some time to enable him to make some research as to
whether the National Council for Teacher Education has
issued any notification, akin to notification dated 13.11.2019
qua the posts of Special Education or not.
To enable learned counsel for the petitioner to do the
needful, we adjourn the case by two weeks.
List on 04.11.2026.”
17. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to
place on record any notification etc. issued by NCTE for the post of
Special Educator akin to the one, upon which the petitioner is
relying.
18. Therefore, in light of the above observations as we do
not find any merit in the present petition, the petition is dismissed.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
(Yogesh Jaswal)
Judge
th
04 November, 2026.
( yogesh )