Supreme Court Upholds Disqualification of B.Ed. Candidates for Primary Teacher Recruitment

The case of Navin Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. concerns the eligibility of Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) degree holders for the position of primary school teachers. The Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether the Chhattisgarh High Court was correct in disqualifying B.Ed. candidates from the selection process for primary school teachers. In its ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision and reaffirmed that only Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) holders meet the eligibility criteria.

This dispute traces its origins to a notification by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) dated 28.06.2018, which had erroneously allowed B.Ed. candidates to apply for primary teaching positions. The Supreme Court, in its landmark judgment in Devesh Sharma v. Union of India (2023), had previously quashed this notification. However, recruitment processes continued in certain states, including Chhattisgarh, where B.Ed. candidates were allowed to participate. The Supreme Court has now made it unequivocally clear that such appointments were unlawful.

Background of the Case

Facts Leading to the Dispute

In 2018, the NCTE issued a notification allowing B.Ed. graduates to apply for the post of primary school teachers (Classes I-V), in addition to D.El.Ed. holders.
In 2021, candidates possessing D.El.Ed. qualifications challenged this notification before the Rajasthan High Court, arguing that primary education requires specialized training that B.Ed. candidates lack.
The Rajasthan High Court ruled in favor of the D.El.Ed. candidates, declaring B.Ed. degree holders ineligible for primary teaching positions.
On 11.08.2023, the Supreme Court upheld this ruling in Devesh Sharma v. Union of India, holding that the essential qualification for primary school teachers is D.El.Ed. and not B.Ed.
Following this ruling, the NCTE issued a directive on 04.09.2023, informing all states that B.Ed. candidates were disqualified from primary teaching positions.
Despite this, the Chhattisgarh government continued its recruitment process and appointed B.Ed. candidates as primary school teachers.
D.El.Ed. qualified candidates challenged these appointments before the Chhattisgarh High Court, which ruled in their favor and invalidated the appointments of B.Ed. candidates.
The affected B.Ed. candidates appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that they were appointed in good faith before the NCTE notification was formally rescinded.

Legal Issues Raised

Petitioners’ Arguments

The B.Ed. candidates contended that:

At the time of their application, the NCTE notification of 2018 was still in effect, making them eligible.
The Chhattisgarh School Education Services Recruitment Rules, 2019, also recognized B.Ed. as a valid qualification for primary school teachers.
They were selected and appointed before the Supreme Court’s decision in Devesh Sharma, and therefore their appointments should be protected under the doctrine of prospective overruling.
The removal of B.Ed. candidates would create a significant shortfall of teachers, disrupting primary education in the state.

Respondents’ Arguments

The Chhattisgarh government and D.El.Ed. candidates argued that:

The Supreme Court had already declared B.Ed. candidates ineligible in Devesh Sharma, making their appointments legally untenable.
The High Court had explicitly directed the government to halt recruitment of B.Ed. candidates, yet the government proceeded with their appointments.
The 2019 Recruitment Rules of Chhattisgarh could not override the Supreme Court’s binding decision.
The appointment orders of B.Ed. candidates explicitly mentioned that their employment was subject to the final outcome of the litigation.

Supreme Court’s Observations

On the Validity of B.Ed. as a Qualification

The Supreme Court reaffirmed its earlier position that:

Primary school teaching requires specialized training in early childhood education, which B.Ed. does not provide.
The NCTE’s 2018 notification was flawed and had already been struck down.
Any appointment made based on the invalidated notification was inherently unlawful.

On the Prospective Nature of the Devesh Sharma Judgment

The Court clarified that its ruling in Devesh Sharma had prospective effect only for those already appointed before 11.08.2023. The benefit did not extend to those merely selected or awaiting appointment. It held:

“The benefit of prospective application is limited to those who were appointed and in regular employment before 11.08.2023. Mere selection or participation in the recruitment process does not entitle candidates to such benefit.”

On the Legality of the Chhattisgarh High Court Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the Chhattisgarh High Court’s decision, stating:

The High Court had correctly applied the principles laid down in Devesh Sharma.
The state government’s continued appointment of B.Ed. candidates after 11.08.2023 was in clear violation of Supreme Court orders.
The appointments of B.Ed. candidates had to be quashed to maintain the integrity of recruitment rules.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled that:

The appeal by the B.Ed. candidates was dismissed.
The Chhattisgarh High Court’s order disqualifying B.Ed. candidates was upheld.
The services of all B.Ed. candidates appointed after 11.08.2023 were terminated.
The government was directed to fill the resulting vacancies exclusively with D.El.Ed. qualified candidates.

This ruling reaffirms the importance of specialized training for primary school teachers and prevents dilution of educational standards through improper qualifications. It sets a precedent ensuring that only properly trained teachers handle early childhood education.

Petitioner Name: Navin Kumar & Ors..
Respondent Name: Union of India & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, Justice Pankaj Mithal.
Place Of Incident: Chhattisgarh.
Judgment Date: 27-08-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: navin-kumar-&-ors.-vs-union-of-india-&-ors-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-27-08-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Recruitment Policies
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by Sudhanshu Dhulia
See all petitions in Judgment by Pankaj Mithal
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments August 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category