The Supreme Court ruled that two Uttar Pradesh Assistant Teachers cannot be dismissed for lacking TET at appointment since they qualified before the 2019 deadline. The bench led by CJI B.R. Gavai restored their jobs, calling the termination order legally unsustainable.
New Delhi: In a significant decision on 31 October 2025, the Supreme Court of India ruled that two Assistant Teachers from Uttar Pradesh were wrongly removed from service because they had obtained their Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) certificates before the legally permitted deadline of 31 March 2019.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran restored their services and set aside the Allahabad High Court’s decision that had earlier upheld their termination from 2018.
The Court observed that the teachers’ appointments could not be invalidated simply because they did not hold the TET certificate at the time of joining, as the Right to Education (RTE) Act had given them time to acquire the qualification.
The appeal before the Supreme Court was filed against the Allahabad High Court Division Bench’s judgment dated 1 May 2024, which had refused to interfere with the earlier order of a Single Judge dated 12 March 2024 dismissing their writ petition (Writ – A No. 17951 of 2018).
The case arose from a notification issued on 23 August 2010 by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) under Section 23(1) of the RTE Act, 2009, which made passing the Teacher Eligibility Test a mandatory qualification for teaching Classes I to VIII.
Later, on 25 June 2011, the management of Jwala Prasad Tiwari Junior High School in Kanpur Nagar, after taking permission from the Basic Shiksha Adhikari (BSA), initiated the recruitment process to fill four posts of Assistant Teachers.
An advertisement was published on 3 July 2011, and applications were invited till 16 July 2011. The appellants, Uma Kant and another teacher, applied for these posts.
The first TET examination in Uttar Pradesh was conducted on 13 November 2011. One of the teachers (Appellant No. 2) successfully cleared the test on 25 November 2011.
Later, the BSA approved the appointments on 13 March 2012, and both candidates joined their posts on 17 March 2012. The first appellant cleared the TET later, on 24 May 2014.
However, a key amendment was introduced to Section 23 of the RTE Act on 9 August 2017, which stated that
“every teacher appointed or in position as on 31st March 2015, who does not possess minimum qualifications… shall acquire such minimum qualifications within a period of four years”
from the date of the amendment — meaning they had time until 31 March 2019 to obtain TET qualification.
Despite this relaxation, on 12 July 2018, the BSA terminated their services, claiming that they were not qualified at the time of their appointment. The teachers challenged the termination, but both the Single Judge and Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dismissed their claims.
Before the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, representing the appellants, argued that
“the first TET was conducted by the respondent-State on 13th November 2011 and the appellants passed the same in 2011 and 2014. It is further submitted that since the appellants qualified TET within the extended time prescribed by the RTE Act, they should not be terminated for non-possession of TET certificate at the time of their appointment and that they should be reinstated.”
He pointed out that the teachers had complied with the 2017 amendment by obtaining the qualification within the extended time limit.
The State, while defending the termination, contended that under the RTE Act, the teachers were expected to hold the TET certificate on the date of appointment. However, the State counsel admitted that both appellants had subsequently cleared the TET before 2019.
After reviewing the facts and legal provisions, the Supreme Court observed that the 2017 amendment provided a “grace period” for teachers already in service as of 31 March 2015, allowing them to obtain the qualification by 31 March 2019. Since both teachers had cleared the TET before this deadline, their removal in 2018 was unjustified.
The Bench held that the High Court had taken an excessively technical view and failed to consider the legislative intent behind granting an extended qualification period. The Court therefore found the termination order unsustainable.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court:
- Set aside the judgments of both the Single Judge and the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
- Quashed the termination order dated 12 July 2018 passed by the BSA.
- Directed immediate reinstatement of the two teachers as Assistant Teachers in Jwala Prasad Tiwari Junior High School, Bhauti, Kanpur Nagar, with continuity of service and all consequential benefits including seniority.
- However, the Court clarified that they would not be entitled to back wages for the period they were out of service.
ALSO READ: Fake ORS Drinks a Health Hazard; Public Safety Comes First, Says Delhi High Court
This ruling reinforces that teachers who were already in service before 31 March 2015 cannot be penalized for not having the TET at the time of appointment, as long as they obtained it within the extended deadline.
The judgment serves as an important precedent for similar cases where qualified teachers faced dismissal due to technical reasons, despite fulfilling their eligibility within the statutory timeframe.
Case Title:
UMA KANT AND ANOTHER VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
SLP(C) No. 22164 of 2024
Read Order:
Click Here to Read More Reports On UPSC
