LexNAVIN KUMAR & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 810 : 2024 INSC 656 Navin Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. Etc. (Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 20768-20770 of 2024) 28 August 2024 [Sudhanshu Dhulia and Pankaj Mithal, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court which quashed the appointment of the primary school teachers with B.Ed qualification. Headnotes† Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Appointment to the post of Assistant teacher in a Primary School – Eligibility of B.Ed candidates – On facts, issuance of appointment orders in favour of the B.Ed candidates by the State of Chhattisgarh, which was after the judgment in Devesh Sharma’s case wherein it was held that the candidates having B.Ed qualification were ineligible for the appointment and as such cannot be given any relief – Petitions filed by candidates holding Diploma in Elementary Education, challenging the eligibility of B.Ed. candidates – Interim order by the High Court whereby the recruitment process as regards B.Ed. candidates was directed to be kept in abeyance – Challenge to, by the B.Ed. candidates before Supreme Court – Clarificatory order by this Court that selection and appointment of B.Ed. candidates would be subject to the final decision of the High Court – Thereafter, petitions filed by the Diploma holders in Elementary Education before the High Court were allowed and service of teachers with B.Ed. Qualification terminated – Interference with: Held: Not called for – B.Ed. qualified candidates were called by the State in the selection process, yet as they were held to be non- qualified by a judgment of this Court in Devesh Sharma’s case, which is the law now and by logic has to be implemented, they were rightly held to be disqualified – B.Ed. is not a qualification for a teacher in a Primary School – Moreover, this aspect has already [2024] 8 S.C.R. 811 Navin Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. Etc. been clarified in the order dated 08.04.2024, where only such candidates have been saved who were selected and appointed prior to the order dated 11.08.2023 in Devesh Sharma’s Case – Since the instant petitioners were appointed post 11.08.2023 and their appointments were also subjected to the final outcome of the pending writ petition before High Court, they cannot get any benefit – Date of appointment which is certainly after the cut- off date, is important – They will stand disqualified, as they do not have the essential qualification for appointment as primary school teachers – Furthermore, r. 8(II) of the 2019 Rules placing B.Ed. as a qualification is again subsequent to the Notification of NCTE, which has already been quashed and set aside by the judgment in Devesh Sharma’s case – Thus, by implication, qualification given in the Chhattisgarh Rules to the extent it makes B.Ed. a qualification also cannot be implemented, following the law laid down in Devesh Sharma’s case – Also, order of NCTE whereby the judgment in Devesh Sharma’s case was communicated to Chief Secretaries of all State Governments for further appropriate action has been shown to the Court – In spite of this, appointments were given to B.Ed. candidates which was illegal and has rightly been quashed by the High Court – Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019. [Paras 10-13] Case Law Cited Devesh Sharma v. Union of India [2023] 11 SCR 167 : 2023 INSC 704 – relied on. List of Acts Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009; Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019. List of Keywords Post of Assistant teacher in Primary School; Eligibility of B.Ed candidates; Diploma in Elementary Education; Recruitment process; Devesh Sharma’s Case. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition(C) Nos. 20768-20770 of 2024 812 [2024] 8 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports From the Judgment and Order dated 02.04.2024 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in WPS No. 3541, 5788 and 7344 of 2023 With Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 10295, 20777-20779, 20776, 13756, 20811 and 20812 of 2024 Appearances for Parties K.M. Natraj, A.S.G., Apoorv Kurup, A.A.G., Amit Anand Tiwari, Sanjay Hegde, Ravindra Shrivastava, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Ranjit Kumar, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Ms. Meenakshi Arora, U.K. Uniyal, Sr. Ad
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.