MP High Court orders reconsideration of Hindi teacher candidate after striking down Second Division rule

In a significant decision for teacher recruitment in Madhya Pradesh, the High Court has directed the state to reconsider the candidature of a Hindi teacher applicant, whose rejection was based on a 'Second Division' requirement that a Division Bench had earlier struck down as unconstitutional. Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke held that the earlier judgment directly undermined the sole ground for excluding the petitioner, Mamta Anjana, from the selection process.

A Second Division Barrier Falls

The case centered on the 2023 recruitment for Higher Secondary Teachers (Hindi). Mamta Anjana had qualified the eligibility test and secured 19th rank in the unreserved female category. However, during document verification, her candidature was withheld because her M.A. (Hindi) marksheet from Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya recorded a Third Division (47.62%), while the Madhya Pradesh School Education Service (Teaching Cadre) Service Conditions and Recruitment Rules, 2018, required a Master's degree with "Second Division."

The petitioner argued that her marks should be rounded off to 48%, qualifying her for Second Division under the university's Ordinance 31. She also submitted a representation to the university but received no response. Crucially, while her case was pending, a Division Bench of the same High Court in W.P. No. 10018/2021 on March 17, 2025, examined the very same qualification rule.

The Battle of the Marksheet

The state and the Madhya Pradesh Employees Selection Board defended the rejection, asserting that the petitioner did not possess the prescribed qualification at the time of verification. They contended that inclusion in the merit list did not confer an automatic right to appointment. The university added that Ordinance 31 was not applicable to the M.A. (Hindi) course, which was governed by different ordinances for affiliated colleges.

However, the Division Bench's earlier ruling had already altered the legal landscape. It held that Column 5 of Entry-I of Schedule III of the 2018 Rules, requiring a "Second Division" master's degree, was manifestly arbitrary and contrary to the NCTE Regulations . The bench noted that different universities follow varying standards for awarding divisions, leading to an inconsistent and unfair eligibility system. It directed that the minimum qualifications prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) should govern instead.

Court's Verdict: A Fresh Start

Justice Phadke observed that the Division Bench's judgment directly affected the foundation of the petitioner's exclusion. He stated, "The basis on which the petitioner's candidature was rejected, therefore, no longer survives in law." The court set aside the selection list of October 16, 2024, to the extent it excluded the petitioner.

The court directed the respondents to consider her candidature in light of the March 17, 2025 judgment and not to reject it merely because her marksheet records a Third Division under the now-struck-down rule. It further clarified that the petitioner shall be entitled to participate in the supplementary recruitment process for 2023, as directed in paragraph 52 of the earlier judgment. However, her appointment will depend on her position in the merit list and fulfilment of all other eligibility conditions under the NCTE Regulations.

The entire exercise must be completed within three months. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.

This decision reinforces that recruitment qualifications must be based on uniform regulatory standards rather than varying university classifications, and that judicial declarations of invalidity must be applied to pending and ongoing selection processes.