HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Dimple Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
1. Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, learned Chief Standing Counsel has filed Short Counter Affidavit, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not propose to file rejoinder affidavitto the said short counter affidavit.
2. There are thirteen petitioners in Writ-A No. 17615 of 2025 and three petitioners in Writ-A No. 18573 of 2025. Controversy involved in both the writ petitions is similar, hence, they are being decided bythis common judgement.
3. The petitioners have approached this court with a prayer to quash the prescribed format of the experience certificate, contained in Appendix-3 to the Circular dated 03.11.2025, insofar as it insists upon experience as Assistant Teacher/ Headmaster, and further to treat the petitioners as fully eligible in terms of notification dated 04.12.2019 permitting them to participate in the remaining process of selection.
4. Placing the facts of the case, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Parliament enacted the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009[The RTE Act, 2009 ](Parliamentary Act No. 35 of 2009), making provisions for free and compulsory education for all c
P.M. Latha and another v. State of Kerala and others
Yogesh Kumar and others v. Government of NCT Delhi and others
P. Mahendran and others v. State of Karnataka and others
Chairman, LIC and others v. A. Masilamani
State of Rajasthan v. Kunji Raman
Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi and others
Teaching experience for appointment as Headmaster must be from recognized regular teaching positions, not from part-time or non-cadre roles, adhering strictly to statutory qualifications.
Point of law: Teacher – Appointment - Respondents are estopped, having allowed the petitioner all throughout in the stages of process, treating her to be eligible and offering appointment, to contend....
The absence of a specific requirement for a headmistress to pass the TET under the 1978 Rules, and the non-retrospective application of the TET requirement to invalidate the respondent's prior appoin....
The court clarified that for teacher promotions under Rule 14, five years of continuous service is required, but it does not need to be in the subject of the promoted post.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of a case, the principles of natural justice, and the consequences of a previous....
The court affirmed that appointments made prior to new qualification rules remain valid, emphasizing continuity of service and entitlement to salary for teachers who later acquired necessary qualific....
Teacher training qualification mandatory at appointment time under statutory rules; subsequent acquisition does not validate; executive resolutions cannot override rules.
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.