Uma Kant vs State Of U.P

2025 INSC 1273 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

JUDGMENT

B.R. GAVAI, CJI

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal challenges the judgment and final

order dated 1st May 2024 passed by a Division Bench of the

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad1, whereby the intra-

court2 appeal filed by the appellants herein was dismissed and

the judgment and order dated 12th March 2024 passed by a

learned Single Judge of the High Court, dismissing the Writ

Petition3 filed by the appellants, was affirmed. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by DEEPAK SINGH Date: 2025.10.31 12:45:08 IST Reason:

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.

3.1. By a notification dated 23rd August 2010, the National

Council for Teacher Education,4 in exercise of the powers

conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Right of

Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009,5 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

requirement to pass the Teacher Eligibility Test,6 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.

3.2. On 25th June 2011, the management of one Jwala Prasad

Tiwari Junior High School, Bhauti, Kanpur Nagar, Uttar

Pradesh,7 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

Shiksha Adhikari, Kanpur Nagar District8.

3.3. An advertisement for the aforesaid four posts of Assistant

Teachers was issued on 3rd July 2011 and the last date for

submission of applications was 16th July 2011. The appellants

herein applied for the same.

3.4. On 13th November 2011, TET examination was held for

the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh and on 25th

November 2011, appellant No. 2 cleared the TET.

3.5. On 13th March 2012, the BSA approved the selection of

the appellants by way of an appointment letter. As a result,

the appellants joined the post of Assistant Teacher on 17th

March 2012.

3.6. On 24th May 2014, appellant No. 1 also cleared the TET.

3.7. By way of an amendment dated 9th August 2017 to

Section 23 of the RTE Act, it was provided that every teacher,

appointed or in position as on 31st 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.

3.8. On 12th 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.

3.10. Vide judgment and final order dated 12th 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

impugned judgement and final order dated 1st 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

respondent-State on 13th 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 Government, by way of a notification dated 23rd 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.

8. By an amendment dated 9th 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

position as on 31st 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

the advertisement dated 3rd July 2011, with the last date for

submission of applications being 16th July 2011. The BSA

approved the selection of the appellants on 13th March 2012,

with them joining the post on 17th March 2012. Further, the

TET was held for the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh on

13th November 2011 and appellant No. 1 cleared TET on 25th

6 November 2011, while appellant No. 2 cleared TET on 24th May

2014.

10. It can thus be seen that the appellants had acquired the

minimum qualifications, including TET, by 24th March 2014,

while the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the

RTE Act provides that the unqualified teachers appointed/in-

position as on 31st March 2015 shall acquire minimum

qualifications before 31st March 2019. We, therefore, fail to see

as to how the appellants can be said to be unqualified on the

date of their termination i.e., 12th July 2018, when

undisputedly they had already qualified the TET by 24th 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.

12. A perusal of the order/communication dated 12th 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

be complied with by 31st 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

dated 12th March 2024 is quashed and set aside;

8

(iii) The order/communication recalling the selection of

the appellants on the posts of Assistant Teachers

dated 12th 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