Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Background
This was a large batch of about 20 connected civil appeals arising from multiple Bombay High Court judgments concerning teachers, including those from minority institutions, who were appointed or sought promotion without qualifying the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). The core dispute was whether TET could be made mandatory for such teachers' appointment, confirmation, or promotion, and what should happen to teachers who had already been serving without clearing it.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court, after reviewing the various High Court orders under challenge, held that aspiring teachers and in-service teachers seeking promotion must qualify TET, since without it they would have no right to be considered for appointment. However, it modified the impugned orders to provide some relief: where a teacher's case showed some deficiency in the process rather than an absolute disqualification, the matter could still be considered afresh by the appropriate government department on a representation being made. With this modification, all connected appeals relating to in-service teachers of non-minority schools were disposed of on these terms.
Lesson Learnt
Statutory eligibility requirements like TET for teaching posts are mandatory and cannot be bypassed merely because a teacher has already been working, but where there is a genuine procedural gap, the law still allows for a fresh administrative look before someone is finally shut out.