TET Qualification Mandatory for Minority Institutions Subject to Final Outcome of Pending Constitutional Bench Reference

The Appellants (State educational authorities) challenged a Writ Court order dated 14.12.2023, which had approved the appointment of the first respondent as a B.T. Assistant (Tamil) at CSI Northwick Girls Higher Secondary School, a minority institution.

The primary contention revolved around the requirement of the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) qualification for teachers in minority institutions, a matter currently influenced by ongoing litigation before the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding the applicability of the Right to Education (RTE) Act to such institutions.

1. Whether the approval of a teacher’s appointment in a minority institution can be granted without the mandatory Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) qualification while the issue is subjudice before a Constitution Bench.

2. Whether the mandate of TET qualification as per the RTE Act creates unconstitutional discrimination between minority and non-minority institutions.

Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, which establishes TET as a compulsory qualifying criterion for all teachers.

The precedent Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust v. The State of Maharashtra & others (2025 INSC 1063), which held that TET is a constitutional necessity under Article 21A and that Article 30(1) does not provide immunity against educational standards intended for the best interests of children.

Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India, which previously granted a blanket exemption to minority institutions, leading to the current Reference before a Constitution Bench.

G.O.Ms.No.300 dated 24.12.2025 issued by the Government regarding conditional approval.

The Court reasoned that holding TET as a mandatory qualification is essential to ensure uniform teaching standards and fulfill the right to quality education under Article 21A.

While acknowledging that the Supreme Court has referred the specific question of minority institution exemptions to a Constitution Bench due to the conflict between Article 21A and Article 30(1), the Court emphasized that it would be "improper" to grant unconditional approval to unqualified teachers in the interim.

The Court reconciled the current legal limbo by applying the Supreme Court's observation that while the RTE Act must be complied with, the final status of minority schools depends on the pending Reference.

Consequently, any administrative approval must align with G.O.Ms.No.300, ensuring that such appointments are not absolute but derivative of the final judicial outcome.

The Court directed the competent authorities to clearly indicate this conditional status in their approval orders, as per G.O.Ms.No.300 dated 24.12.2025. The order of the Writ Court was modified to this extent, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.