Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 22164 of 2024)
UMA KANT AND ANOTHER …APPELLANTS
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS …RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
B.R. GAVAI, CJI
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal challenges the judgment and final
st
order dated 1 May 2024 passed by a Division Bench of the
1
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad , whereby the intra-
2
court appeal filed by the appellants herein was dismissed and
th
the judgment and order dated 12 March 2024 passed by a
learned Single Judge of the High Court, dismissing the Writ
3
Petition filed by the appellants, was affirmed .
1
Hereinafter, “High Court”.
2
Special Appeal No. 441 of 224.
3
Writ – A No. – 17951 of 2018.
1
3. The facts, in brief , giving rise to the present appeal are as
under.
rd
3.1. By a notification dated 23 August 2010, the National
4
Council for Teacher Education, in exercise of the powers
conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Right of
5
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 , laid
down minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for
appointment as a teacher in Class I to VIII in a “school”
referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of the RTE Act, with effect
from the date of the notification. It can be seen that the
6
requirement to pass the Teacher Eligibility Test, to be
conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with
the guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose, was added
as a minimum qualification.
th
3.2. On 25 June 2011, the management of one Jwala Prasad
Tiwari Junior High School, Bhauti, Kanpur Nagar, Uttar
7
Pradesh, which is a recognized and aided junior high school,
initiated proceedings to fill four posts of Assistant Teachers in
4
Hereinafter, “NCTE”.
5
Hereinafter, “RTE Act”.
6
Hereinafter, “TET”.
7
Hereinafter, “JPT Junior High School”.
2
JPT Junior High School with the permission of the Basic
8
Shiksha Adhikari, Kanpur Nagar District .
3.3. An advertisement for the aforesaid four posts of Assistant
rd
Teachers was issued on 3 July 2011 and the last date for
th
submission of applications was 16 July 2011. The appellants
herein applied for the same.
th
3.4. On 13 November 2011, TET examination was held for
th
the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh and on 25
November 2011, appellant No. 2 cleared the TET.
th
3.5. On 13 March 2012, the BSA approved the selection of
the appellants by way of an appointment letter. As a result,
th
the appellants joined the post of Assistant Teacher on 17
March 2012.
th
3.6. On 24 May 2014, appellant No. 1 also cleared the TET.
th
3.7. By way of an amendment dated 9 August 2017 to
Section 23 of the RTE Act, it was provided that every teacher,
st
appointed or in position as on 31 March 2015, who does not
possess minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-
8
Hereinafter, “BSA”.
3
section (1) shall acquire such minimum qualifications within
a period of four years from the date of the said amendment.
th
3.8. On 12 July 2018, the services of the appellants were
terminated by the BSA on the ground that they did not have
TET qualification at the time of their appointment.
3.9. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants along with two others
filed a Writ Petition before the High Court inter-alia seeking
quashing of the aforesaid order/communication passed by the
BSA.
th
3.10. Vide judgment and final order dated 12 March
2024, a learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the
Writ Petition.
3.11. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioners before the
High Court filed an intra-court appeal and the same was also
dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court vide
st
impugned judgement and final order dated 1 May 2024.
3.12. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and
final order, two of the writ petitioners before the High Court
have filed the present appeal by way of special leave.
4
4. We have heard Shri Amit Anand Tiwari, learned Senior
Counsel for the appellants and Shri Ankit Goel, learned
counsel for the respondent-State.
5.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel on behalf
of the appellants that the first TET was conducted by the
th
respondent-State on 13 November 2011 and the appellants
passed the same in 2011 and 2014. It is further submitted
that since the appellants qualified TET within the extended
time prescribed by the RTE Act, they should not be terminated
for non-possession of TET certificate at the time of their
appointment and that they should be reinstated.
6. Per contra , it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
respondent-State that as per the mandate of the RTE Act, the
appellants ought to have obtained TET certificate at the time
of their appointment. It is, however, fairly stated by the learned
counsel for the respondent-State that subsequent to their
appointment, they obtained TET certificate by 2014.
7. Section 23 of the RTE Act provides qualifications for
appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.
In exercise of the powers thereof, the NCTE, being the
concerned academic authority authorised by the Central
5
rd
Government, by way of a notification dated 23 August 2010
prescribed passing the TET as one of the minimum
qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a
teacher in Class I to VIII in a “school” referred to in clause (n)
of Section 2 of the RTE Act.
th
8. By an amendment dated 9 August 2017, the second
proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the RTE Act was
added and it provides that every teacher appointed or in
st
position as on 31 March 2015, who does not possess
minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-section (1)
shall acquire such minimum qualifications within a period of
four years from the date of commencement of the amendment.
9. In the present case, the appellants applied for the post of
Assistant Teacher in the JPT Junior High School pursuant to
rd
the advertisement dated 3 July 2011, with the last date for
th
submission of applications being 16 July 2011. The BSA
th
approved the selection of the appellants on 13 March 2012,
th
with them joining the post on 17 March 2012. Further, the
TET was held for the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh on
th th
13 November 2011 and appellant No. 1 cleared TET on 25
6
th
November 2011, while appellant No. 2 cleared TET on 24 May
2014.
10. It can thus be seen that the appellants had acquired the
th
minimum qualifications, including TET, by 24 March 2014,
while the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the
RTE Act provides that the unqualified teachers appointed/in-
st
position as on 31 March 2015 shall acquire minimum
st
qualifications before 31 March 2019. We, therefore, fail to see
as to how the appellants can be said to be unqualified on the
th
date of their termination i.e. , 12 July 2018, when
th
undisputedly they had already qualified the TET by 24 March
2014.
11. Pertinently, both the learned Single Judge and the
Division Bench of the High Court recorded that the appellants
had qualified TET by 2014. However, they proceeded on the
premise that since the appellants did not possess TET pass-
certificate at the time of their appointment, so their
termination, after working for 6 years , need not be interfered
with.
th
12. A perusal of the order/communication dated 12 July
2018 passed by the BSA would, however, show that apart from
7
finding the appellants to have not qualified the TET, there is
no other basis on which the appointment of the appellants was
terminated. The learned counsel for respondent-State has also
not stated any other ground on the basis of which the
candidature of the appellants was found to be unsuitable for
the post of Assistant Teacher.
13. In that view of the matter, we find that the non-
interference by the learned Single Judge of the High Court and
the same being affirmed by the Division Bench of the High
Court is erroneous as the requirement to qualify TET was to
st
be complied with by 31 March 2019, by when the appellants
had undisputedly passed the TET.
14. We, therefore, allow the present appeal by passing the
following order:
(i) The judgment and final order passed by the Division
Bench of the High Court in Special Appeal No. – 441
of 2024 is quashed and set aside;
(ii) The judgment and final order passed by the Single
Judge of High Court in Writ – A No. – 17951 of 2018
th
dated 12 March 2024 is quashed and set aside;
8
(iii) The order/communication recalling the selection of
the appellants on the posts of Assistant Teachers
th
dated 12 July 2018 is quashed and set aside;
(iv) The Writ Petition filed by the appellants before the
High Court is disposed of with a direction to the
respondents to forthwith reinstate the appellants to
the post of Assistant Teacher in the Jwala Prasad
Tiwari Junior High School, Bhauti, Kanpur Nagar,
Uttar Pradesh. We clarify that though the appellants
would not be entitled to back-wages, they shall be
reinstated with continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits, including seniority, etc.
15. Pending applications, if any , shall stand disposed of.
…………..............................CJI
(B.R. GAVAI)
.............................................J
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)
NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 31, 2025.
9
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 22164 of 2024)
UMA KANT AND ANOTHER …APPELLANTS
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS …RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
B.R. GAVAI, CJI
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal challenges the judgment and final
st
order dated 1 May 2024 passed by a Division Bench of the
1
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad , whereby the intra-
2
court appeal filed by the appellants herein was dismissed and
th
the judgment and order dated 12 March 2024 passed by a
learned Single Judge of the High Court, dismissing the Writ
3
Petition filed by the appellants, was affirmed .
1
Hereinafter, “High Court”.
2
Special Appeal No. 441 of 224.
3
Writ – A No. – 17951 of 2018.
1
3. The facts, in brief , giving rise to the present appeal are as
under.
rd
3.1. By a notification dated 23 August 2010, the National
4
Council for Teacher Education, in exercise of the powers
conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Right of
5
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 , laid
down minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for
appointment as a teacher in Class I to VIII in a “school”
referred to in clause (n) of Section 2 of the RTE Act, with effect
from the date of the notification. It can be seen that the
6
requirement to pass the Teacher Eligibility Test, to be
conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with
the guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose, was added
as a minimum qualification.
th
3.2. On 25 June 2011, the management of one Jwala Prasad
Tiwari Junior High School, Bhauti, Kanpur Nagar, Uttar
7
Pradesh, which is a recognized and aided junior high school,
initiated proceedings to fill four posts of Assistant Teachers in
4
Hereinafter, “NCTE”.
5
Hereinafter, “RTE Act”.
6
Hereinafter, “TET”.
7
Hereinafter, “JPT Junior High School”.
2
JPT Junior High School with the permission of the Basic
8
Shiksha Adhikari, Kanpur Nagar District .
3.3. An advertisement for the aforesaid four posts of Assistant
rd
Teachers was issued on 3 July 2011 and the last date for
th
submission of applications was 16 July 2011. The appellants
herein applied for the same.
th
3.4. On 13 November 2011, TET examination was held for
th
the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh and on 25
November 2011, appellant No. 2 cleared the TET.
th
3.5. On 13 March 2012, the BSA approved the selection of
the appellants by way of an appointment letter. As a result,
th
the appellants joined the post of Assistant Teacher on 17
March 2012.
th
3.6. On 24 May 2014, appellant No. 1 also cleared the TET.
th
3.7. By way of an amendment dated 9 August 2017 to
Section 23 of the RTE Act, it was provided that every teacher,
st
appointed or in position as on 31 March 2015, who does not
possess minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-
8
Hereinafter, “BSA”.
3
section (1) shall acquire such minimum qualifications within
a period of four years from the date of the said amendment.
th
3.8. On 12 July 2018, the services of the appellants were
terminated by the BSA on the ground that they did not have
TET qualification at the time of their appointment.
3.9. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants along with two others
filed a Writ Petition before the High Court inter-alia seeking
quashing of the aforesaid order/communication passed by the
BSA.
th
3.10. Vide judgment and final order dated 12 March
2024, a learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the
Writ Petition.
3.11. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioners before the
High Court filed an intra-court appeal and the same was also
dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court vide
st
impugned judgement and final order dated 1 May 2024.
3.12. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and
final order, two of the writ petitioners before the High Court
have filed the present appeal by way of special leave.
4
4. We have heard Shri Amit Anand Tiwari, learned Senior
Counsel for the appellants and Shri Ankit Goel, learned
counsel for the respondent-State.
5.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel on behalf
of the appellants that the first TET was conducted by the
th
respondent-State on 13 November 2011 and the appellants
passed the same in 2011 and 2014. It is further submitted
that since the appellants qualified TET within the extended
time prescribed by the RTE Act, they should not be terminated
for non-possession of TET certificate at the time of their
appointment and that they should be reinstated.
6. Per contra , it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
respondent-State that as per the mandate of the RTE Act, the
appellants ought to have obtained TET certificate at the time
of their appointment. It is, however, fairly stated by the learned
counsel for the respondent-State that subsequent to their
appointment, they obtained TET certificate by 2014.
7. Section 23 of the RTE Act provides qualifications for
appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.
In exercise of the powers thereof, the NCTE, being the
concerned academic authority authorised by the Central
5
rd
Government, by way of a notification dated 23 August 2010
prescribed passing the TET as one of the minimum
qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a
teacher in Class I to VIII in a “school” referred to in clause (n)
of Section 2 of the RTE Act.
th
8. By an amendment dated 9 August 2017, the second
proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the RTE Act was
added and it provides that every teacher appointed or in
st
position as on 31 March 2015, who does not possess
minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-section (1)
shall acquire such minimum qualifications within a period of
four years from the date of commencement of the amendment.
9. In the present case, the appellants applied for the post of
Assistant Teacher in the JPT Junior High School pursuant to
rd
the advertisement dated 3 July 2011, with the last date for
th
submission of applications being 16 July 2011. The BSA
th
approved the selection of the appellants on 13 March 2012,
th
with them joining the post on 17 March 2012. Further, the
TET was held for the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh on
th th
13 November 2011 and appellant No. 1 cleared TET on 25
6
th
November 2011, while appellant No. 2 cleared TET on 24 May
2014.
10. It can thus be seen that the appellants had acquired the
th
minimum qualifications, including TET, by 24 March 2014,
while the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the
RTE Act provides that the unqualified teachers appointed/in-
st
position as on 31 March 2015 shall acquire minimum
st
qualifications before 31 March 2019. We, therefore, fail to see
as to how the appellants can be said to be unqualified on the
th
date of their termination i.e. , 12 July 2018, when
th
undisputedly they had already qualified the TET by 24 March
2014.
11. Pertinently, both the learned Single Judge and the
Division Bench of the High Court recorded that the appellants
had qualified TET by 2014. However, they proceeded on the
premise that since the appellants did not possess TET pass-
certificate at the time of their appointment, so their
termination, after working for 6 years , need not be interfered
with.
th
12. A perusal of the order/communication dated 12 July
2018 passed by the BSA would, however, show that apart from
7
finding the appellants to have not qualified the TET, there is
no other basis on which the appointment of the appellants was
terminated. The learned counsel for respondent-State has also
not stated any other ground on the basis of which the
candidature of the appellants was found to be unsuitable for
the post of Assistant Teacher.
13. In that view of the matter, we find that the non-
interference by the learned Single Judge of the High Court and
the same being affirmed by the Division Bench of the High
Court is erroneous as the requirement to qualify TET was to
st
be complied with by 31 March 2019, by when the appellants
had undisputedly passed the TET.
14. We, therefore, allow the present appeal by passing the
following order:
(i) The judgment and final order passed by the Division
Bench of the High Court in Special Appeal No. – 441
of 2024 is quashed and set aside;
(ii) The judgment and final order passed by the Single
Judge of High Court in Writ – A No. – 17951 of 2018
th
dated 12 March 2024 is quashed and set aside;
8
(iii) The order/communication recalling the selection of
the appellants on the posts of Assistant Teachers
th
dated 12 July 2018 is quashed and set aside;
(iv) The Writ Petition filed by the appellants before the
High Court is disposed of with a direction to the
respondents to forthwith reinstate the appellants to
the post of Assistant Teacher in the Jwala Prasad
Tiwari Junior High School, Bhauti, Kanpur Nagar,
Uttar Pradesh. We clarify that though the appellants
would not be entitled to back-wages, they shall be
reinstated with continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits, including seniority, etc.
15. Pending applications, if any , shall stand disposed of.
…………..............................CJI
(B.R. GAVAI)
.............................................J
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN)
NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 31, 2025.
9