Pushpa vs State of Uttarakhand - 2023 Supreme(UK) 186

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(UK) 186

VIPIN SANGHI, RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Pushpa – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Abhilash Nainwal, the learned counsel..
For the Respondent: Mr. C.S. Rawat, the learned Chief Standing Counsel, Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, the learned counsel, Mr. U.K. Uniyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Abhijay Negi, the learned counsel, Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

Since common question of law is involved in all these cases, they are decided by this common judgment.

2. The core question, which falls for consideration in these matters is as to whether the State Government is under obligation to act, as per the notification dated 12.11.2014 issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (“the NCTE”), under Section 32 sub Section (2) clause (dd) read with Section 12A of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (“the 1993 Act”) or the State Government may frame Rules contrary to the notification issued by the NCTE, prescribing minimum education qualifications for recruitment of teachers in schools.

Special Appeals

FACTS

3. Special Appeal Nos. 105 of 2022 and 78 of 2022 arise from common judgment dated 31.03.2022, passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1211 of 2021, Om Prakash Gaur and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another and Writ Petition (S/S) No. 6 of 2022, Suman Lal and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others (“the petitions”). In the petitions, the petitioners have sought quashing of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(UK) 186

VIPIN SANGHI, RAVINDRA MAITHANIPushpa – AppellantVersusState of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

VIPIN SANGHI, RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Pushpa – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent