2024 Supreme(SC) 737
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, PANKAJ MITHAL
Navin Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Apoorv Kurup, A.A.G. Mr. K.M. Natraj, A.S.G. Mr. Arjun D Singh, Adv. Ms. Ankita Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Kriti Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Hegde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shashank Shekhar Jha, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Thakur, Adv. Mr. Subhash Chandra Jha, Adv. Mr. Archit Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Vishhal Saxxenaa, Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar Tripathy, Adv. Ms. Erika Yagnik, Adv. Mr. Diva Kant, Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar, AOR Mr. Ravindra Shrivastava, Sr. Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Shrivastava, AOR Ms. Naushina Afrin Ali, Adv. Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Adv. Mr. Aniket Singh Das, Adv. Ms. Devangna Singh, Adv. Ms. Sanya Shukla, Adv. Ms. Krati Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ieeshan Sharma, Adv. Ms. Rhea Rao, Adv. Ms. Selina Raj Mevati, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. P S Patwalia, Adv. Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Hassan Zubair Waris, Adv. Mr. Suchit Rawat, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Amritanshu, Adv. Ms. Aastha Shreshta, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Hassan Zubair Waris, Adv. Mr. Suchit Rawat, Adv. Ms. Aastha Sherstha, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR Ms. Anushna Satapathy, Adv. Ms. Chitrangada Singh, Adv. Mr. Yashas J, Adv. Mr. Vishal Sinha, Adv. Mr. Chandratanay Chaube, Adv. Mr. K.M. Natraj, A.S.G. Mr. Apoorv Kurup, A.A.G. Ms. Ankita Sharma, AOR Mr. Arjun D Singh, Adv. Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR Mr. Rishi K Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Piyush Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Punit Vinay, AOR Mr. Rahul Raj Mishra, Adv. Mr. Avinash Ankit, Adv. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. Mr. U.K. Uniyal, Sr. Adv. Mr. D. K. Garg, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Garg, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Garg, AOR Mr. Akshat Srivastava, AOR Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR Ms. Anushna Satapathy, Adv. Ms. Chitrangada Singh, Adv. Mr. Yashas J, Adv. Mr. Vishal Sinha, Adv. Mr. Chandratanay Chaube, Adv.
ORDER :
1. In Devesh Sharma vs. Union of India, 2023 INSC 704 (delivered on 11.08.2023), there was before us a challenge to the judgement of the Rajasthan High Court dated 25.11.2021 where it was held that for appointment of primary school teachers (i.e., teachers of Class I to Class V), the essential qualification is D.El.Ed. (i.e., Diploma in Elementary Education) and not B.Ed. (i.e., Bachelor in Education), and B.Ed. qualified candidates were held to be disqualified.
2. Before the Rajasthan High Court, the National Council for Teachers Education (hereinafter referred to as “NCTE”) notification dated 28.06.2018, by which B.Ed. qualified candidates were held eligible was, inter alia, under challenge. In our judgment dated 11.08.2023, we have upheld the Division Bench order of Rajasthan High Court and affirmed the findings that the essential qualification for appointment as primary school teachers is Diploma in Elementary Education and not B.Ed. Consequently, the NCTE notification dated 28.06.2018 and the regulations made therein, by which B.Ed was made a qualification, were quashed and set aside.
3. The above judgment of Devesh Sharma (supra) was delivered on 11.08.2023 and thereafte
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
