Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

18-Month NIOS Diploma Not Equivalent to 2-Year NCTE Diploma for Uttarakhand Teacher Posts: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India today overturned a High Court verdict concerning the eligibility criteria for Assistant Teacher posts in Uttarakhand. The apex court ruled that the 18-month Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) offered by the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) is not equivalent to the 2-year Diploma prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE).

The judgment, delivered by Justices B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, specifically addressed the appeals challenging the High Court of Uttarakhand’s decision. The High Court had previously directed the state to consider the candidatures of individuals holding the 18-month NIOS diploma for regular posts of Assistant Teachers (Primary).

In the detailed judgment, the Supreme Court observed, “We find that the High Court has erred in holding that the 18 months Diploma conducted by NIOS through ODL mode is equivalent to 2 years Diploma as provided in the notifications of NCTE dated 23rd August 2010 and 29th July 2011.” This observation formed the crux of the ruling, emphasizing the distinction between the two qualifications.

The Court further clarified the legal position regarding the interplay of statutory rules and administrative instructions. It stated, “It is a trite law that the Government cannot amend or supersede statutory rules by administrative instructions.” This statement underscored the Court’s reasoning that the State of Uttarakhand’s Service Rules, which mandate a 2-year diploma, could not be overridden by NCTE’s administrative instructions.

Date of Decision: 28th November 2023

JAIVEER SINGH AND OTHERS VS THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

Latest Legal News