Supreme Court Allows Delayed D.El.Ed. Candidates To Continue In West Bengal Primary Teacher Recruitment; Sets Aside HC Division Bench Order

A bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Manoj Misra heard appeals against a division bench order of the Calcutta High Court that had set aside a single judge’s direction permitting candidates of the 2020–22 D.El.Ed. batch to participate in the State’s assistant teacher recruitment. The appeals arose from disputes about the date on which minimum qualifications under the West Bengal Primary School Teachers Recruitment Rules, 2016 (as amended) must be possessed.

The Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court division bench’s judgment and held that Rule 6(2) did not prescribe a fixed cut‑off date by which the NCTE‑prescribed qualifications must have been obtained. It found the recruitment notification dated 21.10.2022 to be valid and directed the West Bengal Board of Primary Education to conclude the recruitment process expeditiously. The Court observed that Rule 6(2) “adopt[ed] the standard legislative device of simply incorporating and referring to the minimum qualifications as prescribed by NCTE” and was intended to be flexible to changes by the NCTE. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "C) The aforesaid notification dated 29/07/2011 lays down the minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher. The notification never stipulates any date of eligibility. In other words, on and from which date such eligibility is to be counted and/or assessed is not specified in the notification. It can be the first day of January of the year of recruitment; it can be on the date of recruitment notification or it can be the date on which the candidate is evaluated. At the cost of prolixity it is stated that no fixed date of considering the eligibility is evident from the aforesaid notification of NCTE." The Court also reiterated established precepts that "the rules of the game must not be changed midway, or after the game has been played" in considering recruitment law precedents.

Background The dispute arose after delays in completion and examination of the D.El.Ed. 2020–22 batch, attributed to the COVID‑19 pandemic and dysfunction in the State Board. Appellants, who were TET‑qualified and enrolled in the delayed D.El.Ed. course, approached the Calcutta High Court seeking directions including immediate declaration of results or postponement of recruitment to avoid loss of opportunity and potential breach of age limits. The single judge accepted a statement from the Board that digital mark sheets would be issued and that TET‑qualified candidates undergoing D.El.Ed. who had passed Part‑I would be allowed to participate in recruitment; the writ petitions were disposed of on that basis.

The Board issued a 29.09.2022 notification announcing publication of Part‑I results and indicating that eligible candidates undergoing the 2020–22 training would be permitted to apply; it then issued the formal recruitment notification on 21.10.2022 inviting online applications for 11,765 state‑wide vacancies and expressly allowing "appearing candidates for the session 2020–2022" to apply. Private respondents who already held D.El.Ed. as on 29.09.2022 challenged the single judge’s order in the division bench, which treated the earlier date as the recruitment notification and concluded Rule 6(2) required possession of minimum qualifications as on the date of advertisement; the division bench set aside the single judge’s order and declared applicants like the appellants ineligible.

The Supreme Court analysed Rule 6(2), NCTE notifications and binding precedents (including Bhupinderpal Singh, Rakesh Kumar Sharma and the Constitution Bench in Tej Prakash Pathak) on the appropriate cut‑off date for eligibility. It held that Rule 6(2) incorporated NCTE qualifications “prevailing as on the date of publication of recruitment notification” but did not itself create a specific cut‑off date by which qualifications must have been obtained. The Court found no illegality in the 21.10.2022 recruitment notification, validated continuation of the recruitment under Article 142 where appropriate, allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court division bench order and directed the Board to complete the recruitment process forthwith. All impleadment/intervention applications were dismissed as withdrawn and parties were left to pursue available remedies.

Case No.: 2025 INSC 451 (Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 12660 of 2023 and connected matters) Case Title: Soumen Paul & Ors. v. Shrabani Nayek & Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. P. S. Patwalia (Senior Counsel), Mr. Rauf Rahim (Senior Counsel), Ms. Meenakshi Arora (Senior Counsel) For the Respondent(s): Mr. Jaideep Gupta (for West Bengal Board of Primary Education), Mr. Kunal Chatterjee (assisting counsel for the Board), Mr. Subir Sanyal (Senior Counsel), Mr. Biswajit Deb (Senior Counsel); Mr. Gopal Sankarnarayanan (Senior Counsel, appeared for intervenors from NIOS, assisted by other counsel)