Summary
The Court upheld invalidation of Shiksha Mitras’ absorption as regular teachers without the prescribed qualifications. The State could not relax the statutory minimum requirements or use regularisation to cure these appointments. It permitted qualified Shiksha Mitras an opportunity in the next two consecutive recruitments, with possible age relaxation and experience weightage. This headnote covers the reviewed final merits and relief conclusions.
Issues
- Whether contractual Shiksha Mitras could be absorbed as teachers without the statutory minimum qualifications.
- What limited recruitment opportunity and interim continuation were permitted.
Held
- Children’s right to education includes quality education by qualified teachers. Article 142 could not be used to undo the legislative qualification mandate for the sake of absorption. (¶¶ 19, 25)
- These Shiksha Mitras were not appointed as teachers under the applicable qualification rules, were not covered by the relevant statutory relaxation and could not be regularised as if the defects were mere irregularities. The State lacked competence to relax the required qualifications. (¶ 21–23)
- Those who had acquired or acquired the requisite qualifications were to have an opportunity in the next two consecutive advertised recruitments. Suitable age relaxation and experience weightage could be decided by the competent authority; mandatory qualifications remained necessary. (¶ 25–26)
- Pending those opportunities the State could, if it chose, continue them as Shiksha Mitras on their pre-absorption terms. This did not restore regular-teacher status or confer automatic selection. (¶ 26–27)
Result
High Court view upheld subject to the limited recruitment-opportunity observations. All matters disposed of; absorption as regular teachers without mandatory qualifications not sustained.