“Weightage to Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) marks is not binding on States”, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today held that weightage to Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) marks is merely a guideline and not a mandatory requirement to be followed by states while recruiting teachers..However, the Court also held that qualifications prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) are binding on states..This would effectively mean that candidates would have to qualify TET to be eligible for recruitment, but states can prescribe other benchmarks as well for recruitment, and weightage given to TET marks would not be binding..The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit in an appeal filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, which had laid ‘quality point marks’ as a criterion for teacher’s recruitment in place of TET..The issue for consideration before the Court was the validity of Uttar Pradesh’s decision in prescribing qualifications for recruitment of teachers at variance with the guidelines of the NCTE, on the ground of repugnancy of state law with the Central law on a subject falling in the Concurrent List..The NCTE had issued guidelines for conduct of the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), and also provided for weightage to the marks in the said test for recruitment of teachers. Pursuant to the same, the state of Uttar Pradesh amended its 1981 Rules to bring the same in consonance with the NCTE Rules..Thereafter, an advertisement was issued for appointment of ‘trainee teachers’ in primary schools. Many candidates submitted their applications. However, the said advertisement was cancelled and a fresh advertisement was issued. The justification given by the state for such cancellation was that the result of TET was influenced by the money consideration..As per the fresh advertisement, instead of giving weightage to the TET marks, the criteria of ‘quality point marks’, which was prevalent before TET, was to be considered..This was challenged in Allahabad High Court on the ground that it rendered the Rules inconsistent with the NCTE guidelines. The single judge of the High Court dismissed the challenge, but the Division Bench allowed the appeal and held that the NCTE guidelines were binding on the state. The State of UP appealed against this decision in Supreme Court..Before the Supreme Court, the NCTE itself took a stand that weightage to TET marks was merely a guideline and was not intended to be binding on the states..“Learned counsel for the NCTE submitted that notification dated 11th February, 2011 suggesting weightage to TET marks was merely a guideline and was not intended to be binding on the States. While TET was a mandatory requirement, weightage to the marks in the TET was merely a suggestion. This stand has also been taken by some of the learned counsel in connected matters.”.The Court, therefore, held that while NCTE qualifications are binding on States, weightage to TET marks is not a mandatory requirement..“…since NCTE itself has taken the stand that notification dated 11th February, 2011 with regard to the weightage to be given to the marks obtained in TET is not mandatory which is also a possible interpretation, the view of the High Court in quashing the 15th Amendment to the 1981 Rules has to be interfered with. Accordingly, while we uphold the view that qualifications prescribed by the NCTE are binding, requirement of weightage to TET marks is not a mandatory requirement.”.Read the judgment below: