Noby Kunjappan vs Shelna. K.A. & Ors.

“3.

The learned Senior Counsel, Sri. P.J. Elvin Peter, points out that the issue stands decided against the 6^th respondent by virtue of the judgment of the Apex Court reported in Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust v. State of Maharashtra [2025 KHC OnLine 6761].

4.

On a consideration of the averments in the writ petition as well as the submissions made across the Bar, I am of the opinion that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the petition stands allowed. There will be a direction to the 5^th respondent Manager to appoint the petitioner as HSA in the place of the 6^th respondent herein with effect from 01.06.2023. It is made clear that the 6^th respondent would continue as UPST.”

“J.APPLICABILITY OF THE TET TO IN-SERVICE TEACHERS APPOINTED PRIOR TO 2009 AND REQUIREMENT OF TET

QUALIFICATION FOR PROMOTION OF TEACHERS

164.

There are yet two other connected issues that require our attention. The TET is a statutory requirement introduced under the RTE Act and the corresponding NCTE notifications. It is aimed at ensuring minimum professional standards in the recruitment of elementary school teachers, in line with the mandate under Section 23 of the RTE Act.

165.

Section 23 of the RTE Act vests the Central Government with the power to designate an academic authority to prescribe minimum qualifications for teachers. Pursuant to conferment of such power, the NCTE was notified as the academic authority under sub-section (1), which is empowered to prescribe the eligibility criteria for appointment as teachers in schools governed by the RTE Act.

166.

In exercise of its authority under Section 23(1), the NCTE issued a Notification dated 23^rd August, 2010, later amended by Notification dated 29^th July, 2011, laying down that passing the TET is a mandatory condition for appointment of teachers in classes I to VIII in schools covered by Section 2(n) of the RTE Act. The notifications clarify that the TET must be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE. The legal position emerging therefrom is clear: the TET is not a mere procedural requirement but forms an essential part of the minimum qualification criteria.

167.

Importantly, the first and second provisos to Section 23(2) of the RTE Act carve out a transitional obligation for in-service teachers who did not possess the minimum qualifications at the time of commencement of the RTE Act. They were required to acquire such qualifications including passing the TET within a prescribed time frame. The second proviso introduced by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (Amendment) Act, 2017 extended this compliance period by a period of four years from the date of commencement of the 2017 Amendment Act, which was deemed to have come into force on 1^st April, 2015, i.e., till 2019 and not 2021 if four years were calculated from the date of the notification (i.e., 9^th August, 2017). The express legislative intent was to bring all in - service teachers within the ambit of uniform quality standards.

168.

NCTE's notification also reinforces this requirement by stating that teachers working in unaided private schools, or those already in position as of 31^st March, 2015, must qualify the TET within the stipulated period. The language of both the RTE Act and the notification leaves no room for ambiguity that even those teachers appointed prior to the RTE Act, if not qualified, must meet the TET requirement within the grace period granted. Only those appointed prior to 3^rd September, 2001 in accordance with applicable recruitment rules, or those covered by specific exceptions (e.g., Special BTC or D.Ed. courses), were exempted.

169.

Thus, read holistically, Section 23 of the RTE Act and the NCTE notifications together establish the TET as a compulsory qualifying criterion for all teachers appointed on or after 23^rd August, 2010, and as a time - bound compliance obligation for those appointed earlier without the requisite qualifications. The sole object is to ensure uniform teaching standards across institutions imparting elementary education. Viewed in this light, the TET is not only a mandatory eligibility requirement, but it is a constitutional necessity flowing from the right to quality education under Article 21A.

“M. REQUIREMENT OF MINIMUM QUALIFICATION - WHETHER APPLICABLE TO IN - SERVICE TEACHERS?

192.

It was contended that the term 'appointment' used in Section 23 of the RTE Act would mean only the initial appointment as a teacher and not appointment by promotion. Accordingly, the minimum qualifications laid down by the Council (including the TET) for 'appointment of a teacher' can only relate to 'initial appointment' of such teacher and not an appointment by 'promotion'. Therefore, it was argued that the TET is not a mandatory requirement for promotion.

193.

We find ourselves in disagreement with this proposition.

194.

In legal parlance, the term 'appointment' means not only initial appointment but also covers appointment by 'promotion', among others. In this context, a profitable reference may be made to the decision of this Court in M. Ramachandran v. Govind Ballabh [(1999) 8 SCC 592]. Relevant passage from such decision reads thus:

"6.

... There is no dispute that appointment/recruitment to any service can be made from different sources, i.e., by direct appointment, by promotion or by absorption/transfer. The source of recruitment can either be internal or external. Internal source would relate to cases where the appointments are made by promotion or by transfer and by absorption. External source would conceive the recruitment of eligible persons who are not already in service in the organisation to which the recruitment is to be made ...."

195.

Furthermore, reference may be made to the decision of this Court in K. Narayanan v. State of Karnataka, [1994 Supp (1) SCC 44 : 1994 SCC (L&S) 392] where this Court traced the meaning of the word 'recruitment' and held:

"6.

... 'Recruitment' according to the dictionary means 'enlist'. It is a comprehensive term and includes any method provided for inducting a person in public service. Appointment, selection, promotion, deputation are all well-known methods of recruitment. Even appointment by transfer is not unknown "

196.

Appointment and recruitment are two distinct but not unrelated concepts. Recruitment is the broader process of which selection is a part that culminates in an appointment. Recruitment can be carried out from various sources, which are broadly classified into internal and external sources. Internal sources would comprise individuals who are already employed within the organization. This would include an appointment by promotion or transfer. External sources, on the other hand, consist of individuals who are not currently in the service of the recruiting organization. Direct recruitment is an appointment from external sources or from open market, so to say.

197.

Having noticed what this Court has held in relation to recruitment/appointment, we turn to Section 23 of the RTE Act.

198.

Reading Section 23 of the RTE Act, we find that the first proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 thereof assumes importance for dealing with the contention. For brevity, the proviso is reproduced below:

"Provided that a teacher who, at the commencement of this Act, does not possess minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-section (1), shall acquire such minimum qualifications within a period of five years."

199.

The proviso provides for a deadline for all teachers, who are in service, to acquire the prescribed minimum qualifications within a period of five years. Should they fail to do so, they render themselves ineligible to continue on their post. The objective behind introducing the proviso is to uphold the best interest of the children by ensuring quality education, not only through teachers who were to be appointed after the commencement of the RTE Act but also for in-service teachers.

200.

If we are to accept the contention of the in - service teachers, the abovesaid proviso would be rendered nugatory. Obtaining the TET qualification under the RTE Act is mandatory and the consequence of not obtaining such qualification flowing from the scheme of the RTE Act is that the in - service teachers would cease to have any right to continue in service. Reference may also be made to letter dated 3^rd August, 2017 (discussed in paragraph 69 above) issued by the MHRD which provided a deadline beyond which the in - service teachers, having not qualified the TET, would not be permitted to continue in service.

201.

Having regard to the foregoing, we see no reason to hold that the minimum qualifications prescribed by the Council would apply only for initial appointment and not for promotion.”

“VIII. ORDER ON APPLICABILITY OF THE TET TO IN- SERVICE TEACHERS

214.

Per the detailed discussions above and resting on the same, we hold that the provisions of the RTE Act have to be complied with by all schools as defined in Section 2(n) of the RTE Act except the schools established and administered by the minority - whether religious or linguistic-till such time the reference is decided and subject to the answers to the questions formulated above under section VII. Logically, it would follow that in - service teachers (irrespective of the length of their service) would also be required to qualify the TET to continue in service.

215.

However, we are mindful of the ground realities as well as the practical challenges. There are in-service teachers who were recruited much prior to the advent of the RTE Act and who might have put in more than two or even three decades of service. They have been imparting education to their students to the best of their ability without any serious complaint. It is not that the students who have been imparted education by the non-TET qualified teachers have not shone in life. To dislodge such teachers from service on the ground that they have not qualified the TET would seem to be a bit harsh although we are alive to the settled legal position that operation of a statute can never be seen as an evil.

216.

Bearing in mind their predicament, we invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and direct that those teachers who have less than five years' service left, as on date, may continue in service till they attain the age of superannuation without qualifying the TET. However, we make it clear that if any such teacher (having less than five years' service left) aspires for promotion, he will not be considered eligible without he/she having qualified the TET.

217.

Insofar as in - service teachers recruited prior to enactment of the RTE Act and having more than 5 years to retire on superannuation are concerned, they shall be under an obligation to qualify the TET within 2 years from date in order to continue in service. If any of such teachers fail to qualify the TET within the time that we have allowed, they shall have to quit service. They may be compulsorily retired; and paid whatever terminal benefits they are entitled to. We add a rider that to qualify for the terminal benefits, such teachers must have put in the qualifying period of service, in accordance with the rules. If any teacher has not put in the qualifying service and there is some deficiency, his/her case may be considered by the appropriate department in the Government upon a representation being made by him/her.

218.

Subject to what we have said above, it is reiterated that those aspiring for appointment and those in-service teachers aspiring for appointment by promotion must, however, qualify the TET; or else, they would have no right of consideration of their candidature.

219.

With the aforesaid modification of the impugned judgments /orders, all the appeals (Civil Appeal Nos. 1389, 1390, 1391, 1393, 1395 to 1399, 1401, 1403, 1404 to 1410 of 2025) relatable to in-service teachers of non - minority schools stand disposed of on the above terms.”

“8.

By an amendment dated 9^th 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 31^st 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 3^rd July 2011, with the last date for submission of applications being 16^th July 2011. The BSA approved the selection of the appellants on 13^th March 2012, with them joining the post on 17^th March 2012. Further, the TET was held for the first time in the State of Uttar Pradesh on 13^th November 2011 and appellant No. 1 cleared TET on 25^th November 2011, while appellant No. 2 cleared TET on 24^th May 2014.

10.

It can thus be seen that the appellants had acquired the minimum qualifications, including TET, by 24^th 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 31^st March 2015 shall acquire minimum qualifications before 31^st 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., 12^th July 2018, when undisputedly they had already qualified the TET by 24^th 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 12^th July 2018 passed by the BSA would, however, show that apart from 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 31^st 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 W.A.No.17951 of 2018 dated 12^th March 2024 is quashed and set aside;

(iii)

The order/communication recalling the selection of the appellants on the posts of Assistant Teachers dated 12^th 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.”

“ THE RELIEF

32.

Having regard to the paramountcy of ensuring continuity in elementary education of children, we deem it appropriate to grant limited relief by extending the period earlier stipulated for acquiring the TET qualification, again, in exercise of our power under Article 142 of the Constitution.

33.

Appreciating that the TET examination must be conducted by the relevant authorities expeditiously as well as the time and resources required for the same are limited, we alter and extend the timeline granted in paragraph 217 of Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust [2025 SCC OnLine SC 1912], for in-service teachers to acquire the TET qualification from 2 (two) to 3 (three) years, i.e., the qualification has to be obtained by 31^st August, 2028 instead of 31^st August, 2027, as originally directed.

34.

Needless to observe, it shall also be the endeavour of the respective States and the competent authorities to conduct the TET periodically, and preferably twice every year, interspersed with an approximate period of six months between the successive examinations, so as to afford eligible teachers a reasonable opportunity to comply with the statutory requirement.

35.

We make it abundantly clear that no further prayer for extension of time shall be entertained.

CONCLUSION

36.

With the aforesaid modification of the order under review, all the petitions stand dismissed.”

APPENDIX OF WA NO. 583 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES