Last Updated:
Under the scheme, the state assumes responsibility for teachers’ salaries and benefits, including pension, gratuity and leave encashment.
Supreme Court directed that no teachers be appointed or absorbed in schools and colleges under the applicable statutory framework. (File Image)
The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Assam government and its education departments not to make fresh appointments or absorb teachers in schools and colleges under the state’s provincialisation scheme, pending further consideration of the matter.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices to the Centre, the Assam government and senior education officials while hearing a Public Interest Litigation challenging the constitutional validity of the statutory framework governing the provincialisation of teachers and employees of venture educational institutions.
Under the provincialisation scheme, the state government assumes responsibility for the payment of fixed salaries and other benefits, including gratuity, pension and leave encashment, to eligible teachers and employees in such institutions.
The petitioners, Rajesh Chauhan and Madhab Mukunda Pujari, represented by senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, have challenged the framework on the ground that it allegedly allows individuals to enter substantive government service without undergoing a fair, transparent and competitive recruitment process.
The petitioners have argued that such a mechanism violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before law and equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.
As an interim measure, the Supreme Court directed that no teachers be appointed or absorbed in schools and colleges under the applicable statutory framework, including provisions governed by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993, and the University Grants Commission Act, 1956.
The petition specifically challenges provisions of the Assam Education (Provincialisation of Services of Teachers and Re-organisation of Educational Institutions) Act, 2017, alleging that they permit the provincialisation of persons who do not possess the minimum qualifications prescribed under applicable parliamentary enactments and statutory rules and regulations governing teacher eligibility.
The plea contends that allowing persons without the prescribed qualifications to enter government or provincialised educational institutions violates Articles 14, 21A and 254 of the Constitution.
It has also challenged provisions concerning the provincialisation of tutors, arguing that persons who do not meet the minimum qualifications prescribed under applicable laws should not be permitted to teach in government or provincialised institutions.
Among other reliefs, the petitioners have sought a comprehensive review of persons provincialised under the Assam Venture Educational Institutions (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011 and the 2017 Act. The review, they said, should be limited to verifying whether these individuals possess the qualifications prescribed under applicable parliamentary enactments and statutory regulations.
The plea has further sought directions restraining authorities from allowing persons without the prescribed minimum qualifications to teach in government or provincialised educational institutions.
It also seeks to prevent the state from initiating or permitting fresh teacher appointments through the provincialisation process and has urged that all future appointments to government teaching posts be made through a fair, transparent, merit-based and competitive recruitment process in accordance with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and applicable teacher-qualification norms.
Quick Answers
Ask News18The Supreme Court restrained fresh appointments and absorption of teachers in Assam under the provincialisation scheme due to a Public Interest Litigation challenging the constitutional validity of the statutory framework. The petitioners argue that the scheme allows individuals to enter government service without a fair, transparent, and competitive recruitment process, potentially violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and allowing unqualified individuals to teach.
Ask News18About the Author
A team of reporters, writers and editors brings you news, analyses and information on college and school admissions, board and competitive exams, career options, topper interviews, job notifications, …Read More
September 09, 2026, 08:44 IST
Read More
Source link
[ad_3]
