- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Sets Aside Judgment...
Supreme Court Sets Aside Judgment Allowing Jharkhand Residents Who Cleared CTET/TET From Neighboring States To Apply For 2023 Teacher Recruitment
Amisha Shrivastava
30 Jan 2025 10:47 AM
The Supreme Court set aside a 2023 judgment of the Jharkhand High Court permitting Jharkhand residents who had cleared the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) or Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) from neighbouring states to participate in the recruitment process for Assistant Teacher positions in Jharkhand.A bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal pronounced the judgment....
The Supreme Court set aside a 2023 judgment of the Jharkhand High Court permitting Jharkhand residents who had cleared the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) or Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) from neighbouring states to participate in the recruitment process for Assistant Teacher positions in Jharkhand.
A bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal pronounced the judgment. The Court said that the impugned judgment based on the concession of the Jharkhand Advocate General amounts to changing the rules of the game after the commencement of the recruitment process in July 2023.
"We make it clear that CTET holders and state TET holders who applied after the judgement of the High Court or after the amendment of the Rules would not be eligible for the recruitment process of 2023", the Court pronounced.
The Jharkhand High Court's judgment dated December 20, 2023 permitted CTET and STET qualified candidates to apply for Assistant Teacher positions advertised under Advertisement No. 13/2023. The appellants, who had cleared the Jharkhand Teacher Eligibility Test (JTET), opposed this decision, arguing that it violated the recruitment rules and unfairly altered the eligibility criteria after the commencement of the selection process.
Background
The Jharkhand High Court's ruling came in multiple writ petitions, including a PIL filed by Jharkhandi CTET Utteern Abhiyarthi Sangh and other qualified candidates seeking directions to the State Government to conduct the State TET (STET), which had not been held since 2016.
The petitioners contended that the State's inaction had prevented approximately 3-4 lakh aspirants from participating in the recruitment process, as they did not possess a valid STET qualification. The petitioners argued that the failure of the State to conduct the examination or recognize CTET as an equivalent qualification had led to the exclusion of many eligible candidates.
The High Court's attention was drawn to clause 10 of the Guidelines for conducting TET, which allows a state to consider the eligibility of candidates holding a TET certificate from another State/UT. The Court also noted that the State of Jharkhand had not conducted the STET for several years and directed the State to hold the exam annually.
The State Government, through an affidavit, raised concerns about regional language requirements, arguing that the recruitment process should include stipulations ensuring that teachers are qualified to teach in local and tribal languages spoken in Jharkhand.
The Advocate General informed the Court that the State was willing to relax the eligibility criteria for candidates possessing CTET certificates, provided they cleared the STET within three years of appointment and were residents of Jharkhand.
Accepting this proposal, the High Court directed that:
1. The State must conduct the TET examination every year going forward. It stipulated that the STET should be conducted annually or at least once in three years.
2. Residents of Jharkhand holding a CTET certificate or a TET certificate from a neighbouring state shall be allowed to participate in the ongoing recruitment process of 2023.
3. Candidates appointed through this process must pass the STET within three years in their first available attempt.
4. The State Government shall not conduct the examination for the next three months to allow candidates time to prepare.
5. If the State fails to conduct the examination within three years, candidates who have cleared the selection process shall not be removed from service.
Supreme Court's Ruling
The Supreme Court examined three key questions:
1. Whether the private respondents (CTET and STET candidates) met the eligibility criteria under the 2022 Recruitment Rules at the commencement of the recruitment process.
2. Whether the High Court's order amounted to an unlawful change in eligibility criteria after the commencement of recruitment.
3. Whether the Jharkhand government had the authority to relax the eligibility criteria under the NCTE guidelines and the RTE Act.
On the first issue, the Supreme Court held that on the date of the recruitment advertisement (July 19, 2023), the 2022 Recruitment Rules mandated JTET qualification. Since the respondents did not possess this qualification, they were ineligible at the time.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that changing eligibility criteria after the recruitment process had begun was impermissible. Citing the Constitution Bench judgment in Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan High Court, the Court emphasized that recruitment rules form the "rules of the game" and cannot be altered mid-way unless expressly permitted in the rules or advertisement. The Court noted that the High Court's judgment, based on the Advocate General's oral concession, amounted to arbitrary interference in the recruitment process.
On the third issue, the Supreme Court examined the NCTE guidelines, which allow states to recognize CTET and STET qualifications only if the state decides not to conduct its own TET. The Court observed that the Jharkhand government had explicitly stated in its affidavits before the High Court that it had not taken any such decision. Consequently, the High Court's direction was inconsistent with the established recruitment framework.
The Court held that only JTET-qualified candidates, as per the 2022 Recruitment Rules, would be eligible for recruitment under Advertisement No. 13/2023. Further, CTET and STET candidates who applied after the High Court's judgment or after amendments to the Rules and advertisement would not be considered for recruitment under Advertisement No. 13/2023.
Case no. – SLP(C) No. 4194/2024
Case Title – Parimal Kumar and Ors. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 142