Topic
The Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) is a mandatory qualification for teacher appointments in India under the Right to Education Act, with exceptions and relaxations subject to judicial interpretation.
MP High Court rules that determining equivalence of qualifications for recruitment is an exclusive employer prerogative, beyond judicial scrutiny under Article 226. The judgment reinforces that courts cannot substitute their discretion for administrative authorities in eligibility disputes, impacting service law litigation and recruitment policies.
The Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to protect the rights of candidates in select panels under the terminated Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) scheme, mandating their appointment within eight weeks provided they qualify the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) within three years. This ruling balances equitable relief under Article 21A with regulatory compliance, setting a precedent for post-scheme employment disputes.
Bombay High Court ruled that minority educational institutions are not bound by TET qualification requirements under the RTE Act until the Supreme Court delivers its final verdict. The court conditionally approved an assistant teacher's appointment, emphasizing the interim exemption applies to all minority schools.
Allahabad HC strikes down UP TGT Service Rules for omitting TET qualification, reinforcing NCTE’s 2010 notification under the RTE Act as binding. The state must amend its recruitment rules within eight weeks, impacting teacher eligibility across 904 institutions.
Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that age relaxation granted under a time-bound circular expires on the specified date and cannot be claimed in subsequent recruitments. The judgment clarifies that candidates have no legal right to demand extended concessions beyond the circular's validity period, reinforcing administrative discretion in recruitment rules.
Supreme Court holds that reserved category candidates who qualify for teacher recruitment with relaxed TET marks must be considered for open category seats if they score higher than the last general candidate, unless recruitment rules expressly prohibit such migration. This ruling reinforces merit-based inclusion in public employment while upholding constitutional principles under Articles 14 and 16.