Uma Kant vs State of U.P. 2025 INSC 1273 - Service Law
Service Law - The services of the appellants were terminated by the BSA on the ground that they did not have TET qualification at the time of their appointment - Writ petition challenging this dismissed - Allowing appeal, SC observed: he appellants had acquired the minimum qualifications, including TET, by 24th March 2014, while the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the RTE Act provides that the unqualified teachers appointed/inposition as on 31st March 2015 shall acquire minimum qualifications before 31st March 2019. We, therefore, fail to see as to how the appellants can be said to be unqualified on the date of their termination i.e., 12th July 2018, when undisputedly they had already qualified the TET by 24th March 2014. (Para 10)
Case Info
Key details
- Case Name: Uma Kant and Another v. State of U.P. and Others.
- Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1273
- Coram: B.R. Gavai, CJI; K. Vinod Chandran, J.
- Judgment Date: October 31, 2025.
- Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal (arising out of SLP(C) No. 22164 of 2024); appeal against Allahabad High Court’s Division Bench judgment dated May 1, 2024 affirming Single Judge’s order dated March 12, 2024.
Statutes and laws referred
- Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act): Section 23; second proviso to Section 23(2) (as amended August 9, 2017).
- National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Notification: August 23, 2010 prescribing minimum qualifications, including passing Teacher Eligibility Test (TET).
- Teacher Eligibility Test (TET): As qualification under NCTE guidelines pursuant to Section 23 of the RTE Act.
