Supreme Court Directs State Of Haryana To Reinstate 1300 Primary School Teachers
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
18 Oct 2022 6:34 AM GMT
In long-drawn litigation over 10 years, the Supreme Court finally ended the controversy between competing candidates for Primary School Teachers by directing the State to accommodate all of them.
The issue started in 2012 when the State of Haryana issued an advertisement for 9780 posts of primary school teachers. Pertinently, the Haryana Teacher Eligibility Test (HTET) was an essential qualification per the said advertisement. However, the State did not conduct the said test in 2012, doing so only in 2013. Subsequently, the State clarified that the 2013 test was in fact HTET 2012. This led to litigation between candidates who cleared HTET before 2012 (First List) and those who cleared 2013 (Second List).
The first judgment came in Antim Kumari Vs. the State of Haryana in 2015, whereby the State acknowledged the right of the candidates who passed the HTET in 2013. However, once a combined merit list was prepared according to an interim order of the High Court in May 2017, the qualifying number of candidates exceeded the vacancies, thereby leading to the First List candidates being removed in favour of the more deserving candidates of the Second List.
Finally, the High Court decided the petitions on merits on 20th July 2022, whereby the claim of the Second List candidates was entirely set aside, and those who had been in jobs for over five years were facing the threat of removal. The Second List candidates challenged this in the Supreme Court.
A total of 2233 Second List candidates were affected by order of the High Court. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi represented around 250 petitioners in the petition filed on behalf of Vardharma Chambers. Senior Advocate P.S. Patwalia led another group of around 170 Petitioners.
By way of this judgment, the Supreme Court has granted immediate relief to over 1300 candidates actively pursuing the matter, ending nearly decade-long litigation.
The Bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath heard the petition filed by Vardharma Chambers. The team from Vardharma Chambers, comprising Advocates Shashank Bajpai, Somesh Tiwari, Kartika Sharma, Vidula Mehrotra, and Kaveesh Nair, was led by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi. In addition, a connected petition by similarly placed candidates was filed, led by Senior Advocate PS Patwalia. Advocate Shreeyash U. Lalit also represented similarly placed candidates.
After thoroughly appreciating the matter, the Bench exercised its powers under Article 142 and directed the State to accommodate all the teachers. The Bench was mindful of the State's support for the candidates and the vacuum of qualified teachers.
