Uttar Pradesh Teacher Recruitment Case: Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition

The legal dispute over the recruitment process for teachers in Uttar Pradesh has reached a conclusive end with the Supreme Court dismissing a review petition in the case of Vijay Pratap Yadav & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. The Court reaffirmed its earlier decision, ruling that the fresh selection process initiated by the state government was legally valid.

The case revolved around the recruitment of assistant teachers, where petitioners sought the completion of the selection process based on the Notification dated December 7, 2012. The Supreme Court, however, upheld the state’s decision to start a new recruitment process following its previous ruling in State of U.P. & Ors. vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak & Ors.

Background of the Case

The dispute originated from the recruitment notification issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh in 2012 for filling vacancies of assistant teachers in government schools. Over time, multiple legal challenges arose, with petitioners arguing that the selection process under the 2012 notification should be taken to its logical conclusion rather than being abandoned in favor of a fresh recruitment drive.

The case went through several stages:

Initial challenges led to a ruling by the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) on December 3, 2019.
The petitioners approached the Supreme Court through Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 11323 of 2021, which was dismissed on July 26, 2021.
Subsequently, a Miscellaneous Application No. 1391 of 2021 was filed but was also rejected on September 9, 2021.
A Review Petition (Civil) No. 32 of 2022 was then filed and dismissed on January 11, 2022.
Finally, the current review petition was filed by individuals who were not part of the earlier litigation, seeking permission to challenge the previous rulings.

Legal Challenge and Arguments

Petitioners’ Arguments

The petitioners contended that:

The recruitment process initiated under the 2012 notification should have been completed instead of being scrapped.
The state’s decision to conduct a fresh selection process violated their legitimate expectations.
95 candidates who had not met the eligibility criteria of 60% for reserved category candidates and 70% for unreserved candidates were allegedly selected in violation of the prescribed standards.

Respondents’ Arguments

The State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents countered that:

The Supreme Court had already decided the matter in Shiv Kumar Pathak’s case, where the state was granted liberty to initiate fresh recruitment.
The petitioners’ grievances had been examined multiple times and rejected by the courts.
The fresh selection process was carried out in accordance with legal and procedural norms.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition, stating:

“Finding no merit in the substantive submissions raised in support of the petition, the petition was dismissed on 26.07.2021.”

Regarding the petitioners’ claim that 95 candidates were wrongly selected, the Court observed:

“We have gone through the grounds raised in the review petition and find no reason to justify interference in this review petition.”

On Repeated Challenges

The Court noted that the controversy had already been considered multiple times:

“The controversy having been considered on three occasions, we see no reason to grant the permission as prayed for. Consequently, the instant Review Petition is closed.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court’s ruling can be summarized as follows:

The review petition was dismissed as there were no new grounds warranting reconsideration.
The previous Supreme Court rulings were upheld, reinforcing the legality of the fresh selection process.
The petitioners had exhausted all legal remedies, and the case was deemed closed.

Implications of the Judgment

The verdict has significant ramifications:

Upholding Recruitment Reforms: It establishes that state governments have the authority to initiate fresh recruitment processes when deemed necessary.
Finality of Court Orders: The judgment reinforces the principle that repeated litigation on the same issue cannot continue indefinitely.
Precedent for Recruitment Challenges: It serves as a benchmark for similar disputes, signaling that courts will not entertain repeated challenges to recruitment decisions once the matter has been settled.

The Supreme Court’s decision effectively puts an end to the long-standing litigation over the Uttar Pradesh teacher recruitment process, ensuring that the new selection framework remains unchallenged.

Petitioner Name: Vijay Pratap Yadav & Ors..
Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Justice Ajay Rastogi.
Place Of Incident: Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 23-02-2022.

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

Download Judgment: vijay-pratap-yadav-&-vs-state-of-uttar-prade-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-23-02-2022.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 Uday Umesh Lalit
See all petitions in Judgment by Ajay Rastogi
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in Closed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments February 2022
See all petitions in 2022 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