SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 2154

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J
Partha Das & Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondent
W.P.A. 13989 of 2025 | W.P.A. 13966 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sudipta Dasgupta, Mr. Ali Ahsan Alamgir, Ms. Soma Mal, Ms. Rabia Khatoon, Ms. June Modak
For the Respondents: Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury, Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Vaisya, Mr. Pinaki Bhattacharyya, Mr. Avishek Prasad, Mr. Sourodeep Singha, Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhay, AGP, Ms. Iti Dutta, Mr. Saibal Acharyya, Mr. Arindam Mitra

Court directed equal treatment for in-service teachers lacking qualifications, allowing them to complete necessary training without service disruption.

Headnote:(A) Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - Absence of qualification criteria for in-service teachers and their right to pursue education while employed - Claims of untrained teachers allowed to upgrade through D.El.Ed course - Equal treatment under Article 14 of the Constitution. (Paras 1, 2, 6, 10)

(B) Court's observations on previously granted reliefs extend to petitioners - Delayed selections led to inequities which the Court seeks to rectify by permitting qualification completion while in service. (Paras 3, 4, 7)

(C) Petitioners granted permission to enhance credentials and direct to maintain salary and service benefits during training period. (Paras 7, 8)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, serving as Assistant Teachers, sought permission to complete required teacher training qualifications while in service.

Findings of Court:
Court mandates equal treatment to enable qualification upgrades for all in-service teachers appointed under the same recruitment process.

Issues: Court addressed the equality principle in treatment of appointees under similar circumstances and ensured statutory compliance without interruption to services.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized equal treatment under Article 14 as necessary for the fair opportunity for education enhancement, reflecting on past judgments and the unique circumstances of the case.

Result: Writ petitions disposed of with directions.

1. The petitioners before this Court are serving as Assistant Teachers in various Primary Schools under the North 24 Parganas and Malda District Primary School Councils. They were selected pursuant to the recruitment process initiated in the year 2009 and appointed under various orders of this Court.

2. The grievance raised is that many of such appointees either:

a) possess only Madhyamik (Class 10th) qualification without Higher Secondary; or b) possess Higher Secondary qualification but with less than 50% marks; or c) possess Higher Secondary with 50% and above, but without the requisite two-year Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed) mandated by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Regulations framed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE).

These petitioners seek permission to acquire their academic and/or training qualifications while continuing in regular service and to draw their due salary during such period.

3. This Court notes that by order dated 11th July, 2024 passed in WPA 17597 of 2024 (Santanu Paul & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.), a co-ordinate Bench of Hon’ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha had already held that the absence of 50% marks in Higher Secondary “shall not stand in the way” of the writ petitioners therein undergoing the two-year D.El.Ed. course and that they may do so in Government Recognised Self- Financed Private institutions, in addition to Government Sponsored and Government Aided PTTIs and DIETs, as a special case in view of the special circumstances of their recruitment under orders of this Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

4. By subsequent orders in WPA 18173 of 2024 (Kesto Singh & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.), similar reliefs were extended to other in-service untrained teachers, including those with Madhyamik qualification, waiving the district-wise bar for admission to training.

5. The present petitioners, however, were appointed later in 2025 pursuant to the same recruitment process of 2009, thus missing the window for admission to the 2024–2026 D.El.Ed session despite being similarly situated in all material respects to those covered by the aforesaid orders.

6. The Court has considered that the recruitment process commenced in 2009, thereafter selections were delayed for over fourteen (14) years due solely to inaction of the authorities. As the petitioners stand on identical factual and legal footing to those already granted relief and mandatory training qualifications arise from circumstances beyond their control, this Court is of the view that equal treatment under Article 14 of the Constitution of India mandates that the petitioners and other similarly situated teachers, are to be extended the same benefits already granted to their batchmates, with necessary modifications to ensure compliance with statutory requirements while avoiding disruption to educational services.

7. Accordingly, the Court directs that:

A) For teachers with only Madhyamik qualification:

I) They shall be permitted to pursue and complete Higher Secondary (10+2 or equivalent) qualification through recognised Open Schooling or other approved modes while continuing in service;

II) Upon enrolment and as per eligibility under NCTE regulations (with necessary relaxation hereby granted as a special case), the petitioners shall be admitted to and complete the two-year Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed) course through any Government Sponsored, Government Aided or Government Recognised Self- Financed institutions, in regular or Open/Distance Learning (ODL) mode, without any service interruption.

B) For teachers with Higher Secondary qualification (with or without 50% marks):

I) They shall be permitted to enrol in and complete the two-year D.El.Ed course in the current session from any of the recognised institutions as above;

II) The minimum marks criteria in Higher Secondary, as prescribed under the NCTE Regulations, are hereby relaxed for these in-service teachers

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top