PARIMAL KUMAR & ORS. versus THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

PARIMAL KUMAR & ORS. versus THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

On the date of commencement of recruitment (date of advertisement, 19.07.2023) JTET qualification prescribed in the 2022 Recruitment Rules was the minimum eligibility; the High Court's recording of an oral concession by the Advocate General permitting CTET/STET holders to participate amounted to an arbitrary alteration of eligibility mid-way in the ongoing recruitment process and was set aside; CTET/STET holders who applied after the High Court judgment or after subsequent rule/amendment are not eligible for recruitment under Advertisement No.13; JTET holders who participated shall have their results declared and appointments made strictly on merit.

Parties
Appellants: Parimal Kumar & Ors.; Respondents: The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 20.12.2023; Judgment of Supreme Court Delivered on 30.01.2025
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Teacher Eligibility, Teacher Eligibility Test (tet/ctet/jtet), Recruitment Process, Change of Eligibility Mid Process, Section 23 RTE Act, NCTE Guidelines Applicability
Education Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Service Law Teacher Eligibility Teacher Eligibility Test (tet/ctet/jtet) Recruitment Process Change of Eligibility Mid Process +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Parimal Kumar & Ors.

Appellants

The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 20.12.2023; Judgment of Supreme Court Delivered on 30.01.2025

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether on commencement of recruitment process on the date of advertisement the private respondents or the appellants possessed the minimum qualification prescribed in the 2022 Recruitment Rules
  2. 2 Whether the interim order dated 25.07.2023 and the impugned High Court judgment recording concession of the Advocate General amounted to change of the eligibility criteria after commencement of the recruitment process
  3. 3 Whether in terms of Section 23(2) of the RTE Act and para 10 of the NCTE Guidelines dated 11.02.2011 the State Government could change the eligibility criteria and whether the impugned judgment fell within such parameters

Ratio Decidendi

On the date of commencement of recruitment (date of advertisement, 19.07.2023) JTET qualification prescribed in the 2022 Recruitment Rules was the minimum eligibility; the High Court's recording of an oral concession by the Advocate General permitting CTET/STET holders to participate amounted to an arbitrary alteration of eligibility mid-way in the ongoing recruitment process and was set aside; CTET/STET holders who applied after the High Court judgment or after subsequent rule/amendment are not eligible for recruitment under Advertisement No.13; JTET holders who participated shall have their results declared and appointments made strictly on merit.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned High Court judgment permitting CTET and STET holders of neighbouring States to participate in the ongoing selection process pursuant to Advertisement No.13 is set aside
  • JTET holders who possessed requisite qualification under the 2022 Recruitment Rules prior to the 2024 Amendment and who participated shall be eligible for appointment and their results shall be declared forthwith and appointments made strictly on merit