Supreme Court Directs States/UTs To Notify Sanctioned Posts Of Teachers For Children With Special Needs Before March 28

The Supreme Court on Friday (March 7) directed all the States and Union Territories to notify the sanctioned posts of teachers for special children and immediately begin the selection procedure of the same. It added that those teachers working on an ad-hoc basis in different states be regularised by a scrutiny committee on the merits of each candidate. 

The bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice K Vinod Chandran was hearing a Public Interest Litigation which highlighted the lack of special educators for teaching students with special needs. 

The Court noted that despite several orders passed directing compliance with the October 2021 judgment in Rajneesh Kumar Pandey vs Union of India, none of the states have 'made any appointments on the sanctioned posts for Special Teachers.' 

The Court added that a large majority of those states have not even identified the sanctioned posts required in the states. In the October 2021 order, the Court had asked the Union to come up with a teacher-pupil ratio in such schools with special children. 

The Ratio which is now given by the Union is - "1:10 for a primary school and 1:15 for middle and secondary schools respectively". 

Considering the same, the Court has now directed (1) each state to come up with the notification of the total sanctioned posts for such teachers; (2) after the posts are sanctioned and notified within 3 weeks, the posts are to be advertised in 2 newspapers having wide circulation in the state along with on the website of the education department and official govt. websites; (3) Constitution of the selection and appointment committee of qualified/eligible teachers. Having a Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) Certificate is a mandatory eligibility. 

Notably, the key directions of the October 2021 order were :

Directions to Central government to-

(i) Forthwith notify the norms and standards of pupil­-teacher ratio for special schools and also separate norms for special teachers who alone can impart education and training to CwSN (Children with Special Needs) in the general schools,

(ii) Create commensurate permanent posts as per the just ratio to be specified by competent authority,

(iii) Initiate appointment process to fill­ vacancies for rehabilitation professionals/special teachers, appointing them on regular basis.

On Adhoc Teachers And Appointment Of Screening Committee :

The bench also took note of the fact that in many of the States and Union Territories, adhoc teachers on a contractual basis are presently imparting education and taking classes of children with special needs. 

It further noted, "in some of the States, these teachers have been continuing for the last 20 years, approximately."  Thus the states are directed to immediately constitute a screening committee consisting of the following:

1. State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (for short 'Disability Commissioner') appointed under Section 79 of Rights of Persons with Disabilities ('RPwD') Act, 2016.

2. Secretary, Education of the concerned education department;

3. A nominee of the RCI who will be a competent person having knowledge in the prescribed area.

This shall be the three-member committee for each of the States and UTs.

It was clarified that  "in case there is no disability commissioner available in any State, in that case only he/she shall be substituted by the Legal Representative (LR) or the law Secretary of the State concerned." 

In terms of the function of the committee, the bench specified that "  The Screening Committee shall examine the case of each of the candidates who have been working on contract/daily wage basis to teach these children and those teachers who have been found to be competent/eligible and qualified to teach, shall be given the pay scale of special teacher. The past experience of these teachers shall also be kept in mind. However, the mandatory requirement for each of the candidates would be RCI qualification." 

"Further, in case of a person who was already working and teaching for the last many years, the Screening Committee shall also be authorized consider relaxation of the age limit in appropriate cases." 

The Court has holistically directed that all the above directions be complied within 12 weeks from the date of the order. It underlined, " We make it absolutely clear that the benefits of pay scale will only be prospective and not retrospective i.e. from the date of their such appointment after selection. They will be appointed against the sanctioned posts and shall be given the pay-scale which is to be given on that post only after screening."

"It is made clear that those State where posts have already been sanctioned should immediately start the selection process."

"We also make it clear that in some of the States such as Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Manipur which are represented today through their respective counsel(s) before this Court and have stated that there have been some logistical problems for the appointment of trained teachers in their State too. All the same, they shall initiate the exercise, which shall be subject to the availability of teachers with qualifications as indicated above." 

The matter will now be heard on July 15 2025. 

Notably, the Court recorded the following data on the present  number of special children in each State/UT :  

1.  Andhra Pradesh - 82227

2 . Arunachal Pradesh -  3038

3 . Assam - 55908

4 . Bihar - 85344

5 . Chandigarh UT-  3336

6.  Chhattisgarh- 73765

7 . Delhi - 32398

8 . Goa - 3059

9 . Gujarat - 36710

10.  Haryana - 21111

11 . Himachal Pradesh - 8858

12. Jharkhand - 45598

13. Karnataka - 43719

14. Kerala - 123831

15.  Madhya Pradesh - 120764

16. Maharashtra - Information not provided

17. Manipur - 4078

18. Meghalaya - 3741

19. Mizoram - 3741

20. Nagaland  - 4084

21. Odisha - 86689

22. Punjab  - 47979

23. Rajasthan - 71929

24. Sikkim - 1125

25. Tamil Nadu - 100460

26. Telangana - 32794

27. Tripura - 3715

28. Uttarakhand - 4575

29. Uttar Pradesh - 301718

30. West Bengal - 135796

31. A&N Islands - 716

32. Dadra Nagar Haveli and Daman Diu - 765

33.  J&K - 19035

34. Ladakh - 730

35.  Lakshadweep - 134

36.  Puducherry - Information not provided

Case Title: Rajneesh Kumar Pandey & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors, Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 132/2016

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 302

Click here to read the order