IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.7479 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.27031/2008)

Irrigineni Venkata Krishna & Others                 …Appellants

Versus

Government of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.   …Respondents

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7480-7481 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 27992-27993 of 2008)

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7482-7484 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 30419-30421 of 2008)

CIVIL APPEAL NO.7485 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 30860 of 2008)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

2. The  Division  Bench  in  its  judgment  dated  

August  29,  2008,  out  of  which  the  present  group  of  seven  

appeals arises, has relied upon the judgment of this Court in  

Basic  Education  Board,  U.P.  vs.  Upendra  Rai  and  Others   

[(2008) 3 SCC 432] in holding that the regulations framed under  

the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 (for short,

‘NCTE Act’) do not bind the State Government in the matter of  

fixation of qualifications for teachers in formal schools. This is  

what the High Court said :

“…...Following  said  judgment  of  the  Apex  Court  in  UPENDRA RAI’s case (1 supra), we are of the view that the  judgment of the Tribunal is un-sustainable and is liable to be  set  aside  insofar  as  holding  that  NCTE  Act  has  binding  nature on the State Government in the matter of fixation of  qualifications  for  teachers  in  formal  schools.  In  the  circumstances,  we  find  force  in  the  contentions  of  the  Government that the Central Regulations framed by NCTE  purportedly made under clause (d) (i) of Sub-section (2) of  Section 32 read with section 12(d) of the NCTE Act, 1993  are not applicable or extended to formal school, and that it is  the discretion of recruiting agency to prescribe the necessary  qualification for the SGT posts.”

3. In  Upendra Rai,  this Court  held in paragraphs 19  

and 22 of the report thus :

“19. A  perusal  of  the  NCTE Act  shows that  this  Act  was  made  to  regulate  the  teachers’  training  system  and  the  teachers’  training  institutes  in  the  country.  It  may  be  mentioned  that  there  are  two  types  of  educational  institutions  —  (1)  ordinary  educational  institutions  like  primary  schools,  high  schools,  intermediate  colleges  and  universities, and (2) teachers’ training institutes. The NCTE  Act only deals with the second category of institutions viz.  teachers’  training  institutes.  It  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  ordinary  educational  institutions  referred to  above.  Hence,  the qualification for appointment as teacher in the ordinary  educational  institutions  like  the  primary  school,  cannot  be  prescribed  under  the  NCTE  Act,  and  the  essential  qualifications are prescribed by the local Acts and Rules in  each  State.  In  U.P.  the  essential  qualification  for  appointment as a primary school  teacher in a junior basic  school is prescribed by Rule 8 of the U.P. Basic Education  (Teachers)  Service  Rules,  1981  which  have  been  framed  under  the U.P.  Basic  Education Act,  1972.  A person who  

2

does not have the qualification mentioned in Rule 8 of the  aforesaid Rules cannot validly be appointed as an Assistant  Master or Assistant Mistress in a junior basic school.” 20…………….. 21……………. 22. It may be mentioned that the word “institution” is defined  in Section 2(e) of the NCTE Act to mean an institution which  offers courses or training in  teachers’ education. Thus, the  NCTE  Act  does  not  deal  with  the  ordinary  educational  institutions like primary schools, high schools, intermediate  college  or  university.  The  word  “institution”  as  defined  in  Section  2(2)  [sic 2(e)]  only  means  teachers’  training  institutes  and  not  the  ordinary  educational  institutions.  Hence, it is only the teachers’ training institutions which have  to  seek  grant  of  recognition  or  continuation  of  recognition  from  the  Regional  Committee.  The  ordinary  educational  institutions  do  not  have  to  seek  any  such  recognition  or  continuation  under  the  NCTE  Act.  In  fact,  the  NCTE  Act  does not relate to the ordinary educational institutions at all.  We, therefore, fail to understand how it can be said that the  NCTE Act overrides the U.P. Basic Education Act and the  Rules  made  thereunder.  In  fact,  the  two  Acts  operate  in  altogether two different fields. The NCTE Act deals with the  teachers’ training institutions while the U.P. Basic Education  Act deals with the ordinary primary schools in U.P. and not  any  teachers’  training  institute.  The  argument  of  learned  counsel for the respondent is thus wholly misconceived.”

4. The aforesaid reasoning and conclusion in Upendra  

Rai have been assailed by the learned Senior Counsel for the  

appellants and it was submitted that Upendra Rai does not lay  

down the correct law that NCTE Act only deals with teachers  

training institutes;  that  it  has nothing to  do with  the  ordinary  

educational  institutions  and  that  the  qualification  for  

appointment as teacher in the ordinary educational institutions  

3

like the primary school cannot be prescribed under the NCTE  

Act.  

5. Having  given  our  thoughtful  consideration,  in  our  

view, it would be in fitness of things, if these appeals are heard  

by a three-Judge Bench for authoritative pronouncement on the  

following questions of law :

1. Whether  NCTE  Act  only  deals  with  the  

teachers’  training  institutes  and  the  power  conferred  

upon  the   National  Council   for  Teachers’  Education  

under section 12(d)  of that Act in laying  down guidelines  

in respect of  minimum  qualifications for a person  to be  

employed  as a teacher  is confined  to such institutes i.e.,  

teachers’ training institutes ?    

2. If  answer  to  the  aforesaid  question  is  in  

negative, whether the Regulations framed in exercise of  

the  powers  under  Section  32(2)(d)(i)  read  with  Section  

12(d) of NCTE Act by the National Council  for Teacher  

Education  laying  down qualifications  for  employment  of  

teachers  in  primary  schools  is  binding  on  the  state  

government and in view thereof, the state government  is  

denuded  of  its  authority  to  enact  qualifications  for  

appointment as teachers in primary schools?

4

6. Let  these  appeals  be  placed  before  Hon’ble  the  

Chief  Justice  of  India  for  appropriate  directions.  The  parties  

shall  be  at  liberty  to  apply  for  expeditious  hearing  of  these  

appeals.  

……………………J   (Tarun Chatterjee)

…….…… ………..J

       (R. M. Lodha) New Delhi November 9, 2009.

5