SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, R.BANUMATHI
V. LAVANYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R. BANUMATHI J.
Leave granted.
2. The present batch of appeals raise identical questions of law and fact concerning appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers and B.T. Assistants in the State of Tamil Nadu as per the Guidelines prescribed by National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter referred to as the NCTE) in this regard. These appeals impugn the conflicting judgments passed by both Madras and Madurai Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A. No. 1031/2014 & Others. dated 22.09.2014; and W.P. No. 4558/2014 dated 25.09.2014 respectively. The dispute revolves around the relaxation of 5% marks to the reserved category candidates in the State Teachers Eligibility Test (hereinafter referred to as the TET) approved by the State Government, which is allegedly in contravention of the norms to that effect embodied in the notification dated 23.08.2010 issued by the NCTE.
3. Pursuant to the mandate of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ("the RTE Act"), the NCTE laid down minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a Teac
K. Manjushree v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. (2008) 3 SCC 512 – Relied.
Hemani Malhotra v. High Court of Delhi (2008) 7 SCC 11 – Relied.
State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. v. Kumari Nivedita Jain and Others (1981) 4 SCC 296 – Relied.
Vikas Sankhala and Ors. v. Vikas Kumar Agarwal and Ors. Etc. (2016) 10 SCALE 163 – Relied.
M. Ramanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala and Anr. (1973) 2 SCC 650 – Relied.
University of Mysore v. CD Govinda Rao (1964) 4 SCR 575 – Relied.
Mohd. Sujat Ali v. Union of India (1975) 3 SCC 76) – Relied.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.