Teacher Recruitment: The Allahabad High Court has made it mandatory for teachers of classes 6 to 8 in Uttar Pradesh to have passed the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). The Court has directed the State Government to bring forward a proposal to amend Rule 8. This order was issued in response to petitions filed by Jai Hind Yadav and others.
The Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission to explicitly clarify in the recruitment advertisement for Trained Graduate Teachers (TGT) that this recruitment drive is intended for teachers who teach classes 9 and 10.
While directing that the requirement of passing the TET be included as an essential qualification, the Court also asked the State Government to undertake the necessary amendments; consequently, it disposed of the petitions that had sought the quashing of Rule 8 and the recruitment advertisement.
Teacher Recruitment: Order was Delivered by a Division Bench
This order was delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Prashant Kumar, while disposing of petitions filed by Jai Hind Yadav and others from Prayagraj, as well as Akhilesh and three others from Jaunpur. The petitions had sought to have Rule 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Educational (Trained Graduate Grade) Service Rules, 1983, declared unconstitutional.
It was argued that the recruitment advertisement was contrary to the notification issued by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) on August 23, 2010. Advocate Tania Pandey argued on behalf of the petitioners, while Additional Advocate General Kartikeya Saran represented the State Government, and Advocate Vaibhav Tripathi appeared for the NCTE, among others.
Mr. Tripathi submitted that the State Government had failed to disclose whether any recruitment had been conducted, or if any recruitment notification had been issued, in accordance with the essential eligibility criteria stipulated in the NCTE’s notification dated August 23, 2010. He argued that it cannot be asserted that no vacancies have arisen for teaching positions in classes 6 to 8.
This is particularly significant given that an affidavit filed by the Additional Director of Education acknowledges the existence of 904 institutions where students pursue their studies in classes 6 through 8. Consequently, the petitioners have highlighted this oversight; more importantly, the recruitment notification dated July 28, 2025, failed to clarify which classes the recruited teachers would be required to teach.
In response, the State Government acknowledged the need for an amendment. Subsequently, the Court directed that, in addition to the eligibility criteria stipulated in Rule 8, passing the TET (Teacher Eligibility Test) be included as a mandatory eligibility requirement. The Commission shall issue an amendment clarifying that the advertisement pertains to the recruitment of teachers for Classes 9 and 10. To this end, the State shall issue the necessary directives. To this extent, the petitions were allowed.
