BLOOMINGSTAR J. DIENGDOH Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of writ petitions, assailing the advertisement dtd. 4/6/2020, Addendum dtd. 28/10/2020, and Notification dtd. 17/11/2020, for selection of MTET passed candidates for the post of Assistant Teachers, which are on similar grounds are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The central theme or grievance, that runs through all these writ petitions is that, the writ petitioners are all teachers appointed in various institutions as Assistant Teachers on contractual basis, prior to the implementation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, and the NCTE notification No. 76-4/2010/NCTE/Acad dtd. 23/8/2010. With the coming into force of the NCTE norms, w.e.f., 23/8/2010, only those teachers who fulfilled the said norms, in this case, the Meghalaya Teachers Eligibility Test (MTET) were to be considered eligible for appointment as Assistant Teachers in Lower and Upper Primary Schools, which the petitioners apart from petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 400, 403, 407, 409, 414 of 2020, and WP(C) Nos. 83 and 84 of 2021, do not possess. The prayers however, in all these writ petitions are common, inasmuch as, all the writ petitioners, firstly, pray that the NCTE norms, be not made applicable to them, as they were all appointed before the date of implementation that is, 23/8/2010, and secondly, that in view of their service which is over 10 years, they be regularized in their said posts.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the details of each of the writ petitioners is set out in the table below for easy reference;

(3.) It is to be noted that, this subject of eligibility of teachers on the benchmark of MTET qualification and the cut-off date, thereto, of its implementation, that is, 23/8/2010, has been the subject matter of a number of writ petitions before this Court. An important case which will have a bearing on the instant writ petitions is the case of Probirth D. Marak and Ors. v. State of Meghalaya and Ors. [WP(C) No. 98/2020], and other connected matters, wherein a Single Bench of this Court by judgment and order dtd. 5/10/2020, held that adhoc or temporary teachers cannot seek regularization, when they lack the essential qualification of passing the MTET examination. This judgment on appeal, being W.A No. 21 of 2020, was upheld by order dtd. 10/12/2020, which dismissed the appeal. The matter then travelled before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by way of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 9151 of 2021, which was disposed of by order dtd. 30/9/2022, by directing that the State respondents, that for the candidates who may not be in service presently, but who were in service at the relevant time, be considered for giving age relaxation.