top of page


                    SANJAI KUMAR v. DR. PRABHAT KUMAR Contempt Petition Nos. 1332-1360/2018, Civil No. 4347-4375/2018 – 13th December 2019

CORAM: Two judge bench comprising of Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice M.R. Shah

This case had the rising of several contempt petitions which were later on directed to be closed and disposed thereof.

The facts of the case are that after the 86th Amendment Act under Art. 21 A of the Constitution, the RTE Act arose, which provides free and compulsory education to kids of age group 6-14. The Act also inter alia lays down the terms and qualifications for the appointment of a teacher. The Central Govt u/s. 23 of the Act, issued a notification, dated 31st March 2010, authorising the NCTE as the “academic authority.” The NCTE thereafter laid down the terms and qualifications for the appointment of a teacher & also issued guidelines date 11th February, 2011 to conduct TET- Teachers Eligibility Test & to provide weight age of the marks of the said tests for recruitment. TET was held on 13th Nov 2011 and the result was declared on 25th Nov 2011. Thereafter on 30th Nov 2011 an advertisement was issued for the appointment of ‘trainee teachers’ in primary schools. However the advertisement was cancelled and in place of it, a fresh advertisement was issued dated 7th Dec 2012 which was challenged & set aside by the impugned judgement. The Justification given by the St. of UP for the cancellation was that the TET results were influenced due to money consideration. On 31st Dec, 2011 several lakhs of money were being seized with lists of candidates.

The St. Govt took a decision on 26th July 2012 that instead of giving weight age to TET marks, they decided to adopt the criteria of ‘quality point marks.’

Writ petitions were filed by the candidates who were affected due to the cancellation of the advertisement. While this challenge was pending there were also huge vacancies for Asst Teachers. So the state authorities passed interim orders on certain parameters.

Order dated 25.3.2014 directed the State to fill up the vacancies of Asst Teachers in pursuant to the first advertisement that was issued.

Order dated 17.12.2014 modified the earlier order & directed that the State Govt shall appoint those who have not been weeded out in the malpractice and have secure 70% or more in the TET. Candidates belonging to SC/ST/OBC/Physically Handicapped persons shall be appointed if they have secured 65% or more in the TET. Their appointments shall be subjected to appeals & they shall not issue any equity

Order dated 25.2.2015 indicated out of the 72, 825 vacancies of trainee teachers 29, 174 vacancies to be filled and if the candidate fails to join within the stipulated period provided in the public notice shall be published in widely circulated newspapers & the candidate shall be given three weeks time to join and if they fail to do so, the condition prescribed hereinabove shall follow.

Order dated 2.11.2015 – It is submitted by Mr. Bhatia that 43, 077 candidates have been appointed out of 72, 825 vacancies who after the completion of training till Sept 2015 are working in praesenti. Also submitted that 15, 058 candidates are undergoing training out of which 8, 500 shall appear for the exam on 16th & 17th Nov 2015 & the rest will appear after completing their training. Around 14, 640 posts remain vacant

Order dated 7.12.2015 – It noted the submissions of the Learned Counsel of the State as recorded in the Order dated 2.11.2015 & the grievances of some of the candidates that in spite of scoring more than 70% in TET in the General Category they were not being considered.Contempt petitions were filed.

The Court noted that in pursuance to the interim orders 66, 655 appointments had been made and no need to disturb that. As for the remaining vacancies, the State has the liberty to fill them in accordance with the law after issuing a fresh advertisement.

In May 2018, present contempt petitions filed were submitted inter alia. It was held under OC if they scored 70% in TET & under SC/ST/MBC/Physically handicapped persons if they scored 65% in TET. Notice was issued in the Contempt Petition on 20.8.2018

The issue was as to whether the appointments were appropriate?

The Learned Counsel appearing for the State requested adjournment, which the Court granted for three weeks.

The Court observed that the grievances made by those who complained that in spite of scoring more than 70% in TET, they were not appointed, the grievance was made a whole year after those contempt petitions were filed and judgement was passed and also the State Govt has placed record the district wise break up of all candidates appointed in all categories from all 75 districts of the State.

The Court held that there is nothing wrong on the part of the State Govt to issue various interim orders. The fact that out of the remaining 12, 091 candidates only few could be selected. The Court held that there has been no violation of the orders passed by them as alleged in contempt petitions or otherwise.

The contempt petitions are directed to be closed.

View/ Download the Judgment:SANJAI KUMAR v. DR. PRABHAT KUMAR

–  Nardhana Ram



bottom of page