1. Mr. V.B.S. Negi, learned senior counsel for the petitioners filed a supplementary affidavit bringing on record the office letter issued by the Director dated 16.02.2026, whereby, in compliance to the interim direction of this court dated 15.01.2026 in WPSS No. 143 of 2026 the provisional appointment has been offered to the candidate, who are B.Ed. degree holder, and having the eligibility of CTET-I with this stipulation that the appointment shall be subject to the final outcome of this petition. Mr. Negi pointed out that on the previous date the Secretary to the Government placed by placing reliance to the Devesh Sharma vs. Union of India and Others i.e. Civil Appeal No. 5068 of 2023 decided on 11.08.2023 submits that the petitioners who are B.Ed. degree holders cannot be offered appointment.

2. Mr. Negi submits that after taking into consideration the submissions of the Secretary and the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Devesh Sharma (Supra) this court observed that the eligibility of the petitioners has to be seen on the date when the advertisement was issued in the year 2016 since pursuant to the said advertisement the appointment has been offered to those who though were B.Ed. degree holders but having CTET and as per the stand of CBSE and NCTE the CTET holders are not at all eligible to be appointed. Mr. Negi submits that after taking note of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, this court take a very liberal view by posting the matter after a week.

3. It is very strange and surprising that the respondents are taking the defence that the petitioners are the B.Ed. degree holders, therefore, they cannot be offered appointment and on the other side the appointments are being offered to the B.Ed. degree holders who are having the CTET. It appears that the official respondents are either misleading to the court or to safeguard those erring officials, who were responsible to offer the appointments.

4. Mr. P.S. Bisht, learned Chief Standing Counsel, at this juncture pointed out that one correction application has been moved in the case of Devesh Sharma (supra) by the State of Madhya Pradesh before the Apex Court and the order was modified on 08.04.2023 as under:

“As it appears that a large number of candidates with B.Ed. degree had already been appointed on the basis of eligibility criteria specified by the educational authorities, we do not think it to be equitable to effect their removal. We, accordingly hold that the judgment delivered by this Bench on 11th August, 2023 shall have prospective operation. But prospective operation of this judgment shall be only for those candidates who were appointed without any qualification or conditions imposed by any Court of Law to the effect that their appointment would be subject to final outcome of the case which might have had been instituted by them and such candidates were in regular employment without any disqualification and were appointed in pursuance of a notice of advertisement where B.Ed. was stipulated to be valid qualification. Services of only such candidates shall not be disturbed because of this judgment. We make it clear that this benefit is only for the candidates who were appointed prior to the date our judgment was delivered, on 11th August, 2023. Mere selection of such candidates of their participation in the process will not entitle them for a benefit under our present order.”

5. Though the order was modified by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 08.04.2024 but surprisingly the Director passed the order on 16.02.2026 by offering the appointment to the B.Ed. degree holders, which itself reveals that the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 08.04.2024 is completely overlooked and on the previous date when the Secretary join the proceeding on 24.03.2026 he has not disclose about this fact. It is also very surprising that the Director who passed the office letter dated 16.02.2026 was retired on 20.02.2026 as reported by Mr.