Case Note & Summary
The appellant, H. Suriyakala, was appointed as Tamil Pandit in a Government Aided Higher Secondary School in 2012. The essential qualification of passing the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) was introduced in 2009. Since the appellant did not possess TET, action was initiated to terminate her service. She approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, which was dismissed. The appellant was relieved from the post in 2020 following the Supreme Court's judgment that TET is mandatory. The present writ appeal was filed against the dismissal of the writ petition. During the appeal, the appellant's counsel brought to the Court's notice that the Supreme Court in a Review Petition (Civil) Diary No.53434/2025 reported in 2026 INSC 597 had extended the time granted in paragraph No.217 of Anjumanjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust v. State of Maharastra for in-service teachers to acquire TET qualification from 2 to 3 years, i.e., by 31st August 2028. The High Court, considering that the appellant is an in-service teacher, held that she is entitled to the benefit of the extension. The Court set aside the termination order and directed the respondents to reinstate the appellant with continuity of service but without back wages. The appellant was granted time to acquire TET qualification by 31st August 2028.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Teacher Eligibility Test - Mandatory Qualification - Right to Benefit of Extension - The appellant, appointed as Tamil Pandit in 2012 without TET, was terminated. The Supreme Court in Review Petition extended time for in-service teachers to acquire TET by 31st August 2028. The High Court held that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the extension and set aside the termination, directing reinstatement with continuity of service but without back wages. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, an in-service teacher appointed before the introduction of TET, is entitled to the benefit of the extension of time granted by the Supreme Court to acquire TET qualification.
Final Decision
The writ appeal is allowed. The order dated 04.08.2022 in W.P.No.2832/2016 is set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the appellant with continuity of service but without back wages. The appellant is granted time to acquire TET qualification by 31st August 2028.
Law Points
- Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) is mandatory for appointment as teacher
- In-service teachers must acquire TET qualification within extended time as per Supreme Court orders
- Extension of time from 2 to 3 years granted in Review Petition applies to all in-service teachers
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (06) 109
WA No. 600 of 2023 and CMP Nos. 5829 & 5831 of 2023
S. M. Subramaniam, N.Senthilkumar
Mr.G.Sankaran (Senior Counsel for Mr.Nedunchezhiyan) for Appellant, Dr.R.Gouri (Government Counsel for R1, R2 & R4), Mr.C.Kathiravan (Standing Counsel for TRB for R5), Mr.J.Harikrishna (Standing Counsel for NITE for R7) for Respondents
The Chief Educational Officer, The District Educational Officer, Secretary of N.S.Iyah Memorial Higher Secondary School, State of Tamil Nadu, Teachers Recruitment Board, Union of India, National Council For Teachers Education
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Appeal against dismissal of Writ Petition seeking approval of appointment as Tamil Pandit
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought setting aside of termination order and reinstatement with continuity of service
Filing Reason
Appellant was terminated for not possessing TET qualification, which was introduced after her appointment
Previous Decisions
Writ Petition No.2832/2016 was dismissed on 04.08.2022; appellant was relieved in 2020 following Supreme Court judgment
Issues
Whether the appellant, an in-service teacher appointed before TET became mandatory, is entitled to the benefit of the Supreme Court's extension of time to acquire TET qualification.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant's counsel submitted that the Supreme Court in Review Petition extended time for in-service teachers to acquire TET by 31st August 2028.
Respondents opposed the appeal, but the Court found the appellant entitled to the extension.
Ratio Decidendi
In-service teachers who were appointed before the introduction of TET are entitled to the benefit of the extension of time granted by the Supreme Court to acquire TET qualification, and termination on the ground of not possessing TET is not sustainable during the extended period.
Judgment Excerpts
The present writ appeal has been instituted to assail the writ order dated 04.08.2022 passed in W.P.No.2832 of 2016.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a Review Petition (Civil) Diary No.53434/2025 reported in 2026 INSC 597 has passed further orders by extending the time granted in paragraph No.217 of Anjumanjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust v. State of Maharastra for in-service teachers to acquire TET qualification from 2 (two) to 3 (three) years, i.e, the qualification has to be obtained by 31st August, 2028 instead of 31st August, 2026.
Procedural History
Appellant filed W.P.No.2832/2016 seeking approval of appointment; writ petition dismissed on 04.08.2022; appellant was relieved in 2020; present writ appeal filed against dismissal; during appeal, Supreme Court's extension order was brought to notice.
