NDLI: Ram Sharan Maurya and Others Vs. State of U.p. and Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	To the post of Assistant Teacher of Junior Basic School Shiksha Mitras’ Anand Kumar Yadav case passing of Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) Recruitment Service Law
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (73 of 1993) Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (35 of 2009)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11 Referred Case 12 Referred Case 13 Referred Case 14 Referred Case 15 Referred Case 16
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Others
Headnote	Service Law:Recruitment – To the post of Assistant Teacher of Junior BasicSchool – By judgment in *Anand Kumar Yadav case ‘Shiksha Mitras’were given opportunity to be considered for next two recruitmentsto the post of Assistant Teacher – State amended U.P. Basic Education(Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 making ‘Shiksha Mitras’ eligiblefor appointment to the post of Assistant Teachers of Junior BasicSchools – Qualification for the same included passing of TeachersEligibility Test (TET) and Assistant Teacher Recruitment Examination(ATRE) – For ATRE-2018, minimum qualifying marks for General& OBC candidates was 45% and for SC/ST was 40% – Candidateswere selected for appointment – National Council for TeachersEducation by Notification dated 28.6.2018 laid down thatcandidates holding B.Ed. degree could be entitled to be appointedas teacher for classes I to V provided they undergo six months bridgecourse – Rules 1981 were subsequently amended in terms of theNCTE Notification dated 28.6.2018 with retrospective effect –Thereafter ATRE-2019 was notified for filling up 69000 vacanciesfor Assistant Teachers – The same was conducted without notifyingminimum qualifying marks – After conducting the exam, Stateprescribed minimum qualifying marks i.e. 65% for General categoryand 60% for all other reserved categories – Writ petitions filed by‘Shiksha Mitras’ assailing fixation of minimum qualifying marks –Single Judge of High Court allowed the wirt petition filed by ‘ShikshaMitras’ – In appeal, Division Bench of High Court reversed theorder of Single Judge – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: NCTE isentitled to lay down the norms for appointment of teachers for classesI to V – Such prescription is binding on the State – Amendment of1981 Rules has to be read in confirmity with the NCTE Notificationdated 28.6.2018 – The eligibility norms having already beenconferred by Notification dated 28.6.2018, amendments to 1981Rules with retrospective effect cannot be said to have conferredeligibility norms for the first time – Therefore, B.Ed. candidates wererightly allowed to participate in the selection process – Cut-off marksfor ATRE-2019 at 65-60% cannot be termed as exclusionary orillegal as the same was designed to garner the best talent which isin consistence with the objectives of RTE Act – Government isempowered to lay down minimum marks from time to time – Suchpower can be exercised even after the examination is over, providedsuch exercise is not actuated by any malice or ill-will – NationalCouncil for Teachers Education Act, 1993 – Right to EducationAct, 2005 – Uttar Pradesh Basic Education (Teachers) ServiceRules, 1981 – Rules 2(1)(x), 8 and 14.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 646
Petitioner	Ram Sharan Maurya And Others
Respondent	State Of U.p. And Others
SCR	[2020] 12 S.C.R. 466
Judgement Date	2020-11-18
Case Number	3707

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Ram Sharan Maurya and Others Vs. State of U.p. and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Committee of Management, Kanya Junior High School Bal Vidya Mandir, Etah, U.p. Vs. Sachiv, U.p. Basic Shiksha Parishad Allahabad, U.p. and Ors.

Omkar Singh Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Gupta and Ors. Vs. State of U.p. and Ors.

V. Lavanya & Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented By Its Principal Secretary & Ors.

Ram Kumar Patel & Ors. Etc. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors. Etc.

U.p. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and Ors. Vs. Raj Kumar Agnihotri

State of U.p. & Ors. Vs. Pawan Kumar Divedi & Ors,

Vinod Sharma and Ors. Vs. Director of Education [basic] U.p. and Ors.

U.p. Basic Shiksha Parishad and Anr. Etc. Etc. Vs. Hari Deo Mani Tripathi and Ors. Etc. Etc.

Ram Sharan Maurya and Others Vs. State of U.p. and Others

Ram Sharan Maurya and Others Vs. State of U.p. and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Committee of Management, Kanya Junior High School Bal Vidya Mandir, Etah, U.p. Vs. Sachiv, U.p. Basic Shiksha Parishad Allahabad, U.p. and Ors.

Omkar Singh Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Gupta and Ors. Vs. State of U.p. and Ors.

V. Lavanya & Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented By Its Principal Secretary & Ors.

Ram Kumar Patel & Ors. Etc. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors. Etc.

U.p. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and Ors. Vs. Raj Kumar Agnihotri

State of U.p. & Ors. Vs. Pawan Kumar Divedi & Ors,

Vinod Sharma and Ors. Vs. Director of Education [basic] U.p. and Ors.

U.p. Basic Shiksha Parishad and Anr. Etc. Etc. Vs. Hari Deo Mani Tripathi and Ors. Etc. Etc.

Ram Sharan Maurya and Others Vs. State of U.p. and Others