RANU HAZARIKA & ORS. versus STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 3 S.C.R. 280 · Decided: 28-02-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
[2011) 3 S.C.R. 280 
RANU HAZARIKA & ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF ASSAM & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No.2153 of 2011 etc.) 
FEBRUARY 28, 2011 
[D.K. JAIN AND H.L. DATTU, JJ.] 
Assam Elementary Education (Provincialization) 
(Amendment) Rules, 2005: 
Teachers Training - Elementary/Primary Schools - The 
amendment Rules substituting the requirement of diploma in 
teachers training by providing that preference would be given 
to trained candidates - High Court holding the amendment 
0 invalid being contrary to the NCTE Act and the Regulation 
2001, but allowing the State Government to complete the 
recruitment process - Held: The decision of the High Court, 
permitting the State Government to continue with the 
recruitment process, initiated on the basis of the Amendment 
E Rules, 2005, which have been declared by it to be illegal, is 
clearly indefensible - High Court could not have permitted 
the State Government to perpetuate an illegality - Having 
failed to sustain the Amendment Rules, 2005 before the High 
Court, it would be improper for the State to go ahead with the 
recruitments under the said amended Rules which have been 
F declared null and void, particularly, when the decision of the 
High Court on that issue has not been questioned by it - The 
leave granted by the High Court to the State to complete the 
selection process in terms of employment notice dated 2-12-
2005, is set aside and the said notice (dated 02-12-2005) is 
· G a/so 
quashed 
-
Assam 
Elementary 
Education 
(Provincialization) Rules, 1977 - National Council for Teacher 
Education (Determination of Minimum Qualifications for 
Recruitment of Teachers in Schools) Regulations, 2001 -
National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. 
H 
280 
RANU HAZARIKA & ORS. v. STATE OF ASSAM & 
281 
ORS. 
Writ petitions were filed before the High Court A 1 
challenging 
the Assam 
Elementary Education 
(Provincialization) (Amendment) Rules, 2005 whereby the 
State Government provided that preference to trained 
candidates would be given in the appointments of 
teachers in elementary/primary schools., and the B 
consequent employment notice dated 2.12.2005. It was 
the case of the writ petitioners that in the State of AssalTI, 
in March 1999, a pre-service teacher's training course of 
two years duration leading to award of diploma had been 
introduced and the admission to the said course was c 
regulated by an advertisement published in the 
newspapers on 14-4-1999. In the said advertisement, it 
was mentioned that the pre-service training course 
leading to an award of diploma in education, for which 
applications were invited, had be6n designed to secure 
0 
improvement of the professional skill of the persons to 
be recruited as teachers in elementary schools against 
the vacancies that would occur in the near future. Most 
of the writ petitioners applied for joining the diploma 
course pursuant to the said notice/advertisement and 
E 
completed the two years course leading to the award of 
diploma. After the commencement of the said course in 
the year 2000, two batches, totalling 900 persons, 
completed the course, qualified and were awarded 
diploma. However, the State Government discontinued 
the course with effect from the year 2003. The High Court 
F 
though held the Assam Elementary Education 
(Provincialization) (Amendment) Rules, 2005 as invalid 
being contrary to National Council for Teacher Education 
Act, 1993 and the National Council for Teacher Education 
(Determination of Minimum Qualifications for Recruitment G 
of Teachers in Schools) Regulations, 2001, yet atlowed 
the State Government to complete the recruitment 
process initiated pursuant to 'the employment notice 
dated 2.12.2005. Aggrieved, the writ petitioners filed the 
appeals. 
H 
282 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 It is manifest from the Preamble to the 
National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 that it 
had been enacted with a view to achieving planned and 
8 coordinated development; and proper maintenance of 
norms and standards in the teacher education system 
etc. throughout the country. In exercise of powers 
conferred on the NCTE u/s 32(2)(d)(i) of the Act, it framed 
National Council for Teacher Education (Determination of 
C Minimum Qualifications for Recruitment of Teachers in 
Schools) Regulations, 2001, which in so far as the 
elementary/primary schools are concerned, inter alia, 
provided Diploma of certifica
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.