Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals Against Termination of Over 8000 Teachers

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Follow us

The Supreme Court dismissed a series of petitions by teachers against the termination of their services. The Bench held that when the very employment was declared illegal, they cannot afford any benefit to the employee.

Brief Facts of the Case

The present appeal finds its origin in a 2017 judgment of the SC in Sri Tanmoy Nath v State of Tripura. In that case, 10,323 teachers’ appointments were challenged. The High Court held that these appointments were contrary to the provisions of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. The Court held them to be arbitrary and illegal. It was appealed against in the Supreme Court. The Apex Court in 2017 rejected the appeals as they failed to find any grounds to interfere with the impugned order. They made certain modifications and directed the State to start a fresh selection process.

As per record, 8,882 ad-hoc teachers were employed in the Education department, and keeping in mind the Tanmoy Nath judgment their employment was to be terminated after 2019-20.

The teachers started approaching the High Court again, but the Court dismissed the applications. They are seeking a review of the earlier judgment, which is impermissible by law and the doctrine of merger. An appeal was made to the Supreme Court.

Arguments by the Appellants

Various groups of appellants filed several appeals. The following arguments were advanced:

  • The Counsel for a group of appellant alleged that over 20,000 posts are vacant, but only 4,300 have been appointed. Hence, the teachers whose services were terminated should be reappointed.
  • Despite the age relaxation and alternate employment given, the teachers would face certain issues like — Their past service would be unaccounted.
    – They would start at the bottom.
    – It would be degradation if they are offered a post in Group-C or D.

Arguments by the Respondent

The Senior Advocate appearing for the State reiterated the ruling of Tanmoy Nath’s case. He further submitted that when the employment itself is illegal, the past service cannot be recognized. The Government has afforded the teachers with adequate opportunity by way of age relaxation and alternate employment.

The Counsel refuted the appellant’s claims alleging a vacancy of over 20,000 posts. He said they were incorrect and included figures from a notification published earlier that is subject to a Contempt case.

Court’s Observations

The Court observed that the employment of these ad-hoc teachers had already been extended from 2017 to 2020. “It is a matter of record that the services of such candidates now stand terminated.”

The age relaxation afforded by the State is adequate. Considering that the very appointment has been held to be illegal, no extra advantage can be conferred upon the candidates.

The Court opined that offering alternate employment is not degrading the candidates. It is to provide some solace to them, even if they fail the selection procedure. The candidates have full opportunity to apply and, if eligible, get selected for the posts till 31.03.2023.

Court’s Order

The Division Bench comprising of Justice Vineet Saran and Justice U.U. Lalit failed to find any substance in the appeals and thus dismissed the same.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -