Supreme Court: Teachers’ Termination for Lack of TET Qualification Set Aside; Reinstatement Directed

The appeals arose from orders of the Allahabad High Court affirming the termination of two Assistant Teachers appointed in 2012 by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari (BSA) on the ground that they lacked the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) qualification at the time of appointment. The appellants were selected pursuant to the July 2011 recruitment advertisement, joined their posts in March 2012, and subsequently cleared the TET, one in November 2011 and the other in May 2014. Their services were terminated in July 2018 despite the statutory relaxation under the 2017 amendment to Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which allowed teachers appointed before 31 March 2015 to obtain the prescribed qualification within four years, i.e., up to 31 March 2019.

The appellants argued that since both had qualified within the extended time frame, their termination was contrary to the legislative intent behind the amendment and violative of the principles of fairness. The State, however, defended the action, maintaining that eligibility was a precondition for appointment and that subsequent acquisition of TET could not validate an irregular appointment.

Main Issue: Whether the termination of teachers appointed without TET qualification but who obtained it within the extended statutory period prescribed under the amended Section 23 of the Right to Education Act was legally sustainable.

Supreme Court’s Ruling: The Apex Court held that once the appellants had obtained the TET qualification before 31 March 2019, the deadline fixed by Parliament through the 2017 amendment, their termination solely on the ground of lacking such qualification at the time of appointment was unsustainable. It was observed that the purpose of the amendment was to protect the services of teachers who had acquired the qualification within the prescribed period and to prevent unnecessary loss of employment. Finding the High Court’s approach overly technical, the Court set aside the termination orders and directed reinstatement of the appellants with continuity of service and consequential benefits, but without back wages.

The appeals were accordingly allowed in favour of the teachers.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below