Bombay High Court Allows Continuation of Teachers Who Cleared TET/CTET Before Supreme Court’s 2025 Ruling.
11-September-2025
Civil Writ Petition >> Civil & Consumer Law
The Bombay High Court in the matter of Sagar Dattatray Chorghe & Another v/s The State of Maharashtra Through the Secretary, Department of Education & Sports, Mumbai & Others has passed a significant judgment on whether the qualifications in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) and the continuance of teachers in aided schools would have to be decided in the wake of the recent Supreme Court verdict dated 1st September 2025 in the case of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust vs. State of Maharashtra. Two instructors had approached the Court after their sanctions had been refused, and their salaries detained, on the basis that they had failed to clear the TET within the time limit.
Background of the Case:
The two petitioners here were recruited in 2013. Both were first employed on the unaided divisions of schools and subsequently applied for transfer to aided sections. They did not have the TET qualification at the time of appointment as the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) had made it obligatory from 2013 under the Right of Education (RTE) Act.
One of the petitioners, Sagar Dattatray Chorghe, passed the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) in 2021, while the other petitioner, Sangeeta Ramchandra Salunke, also passed CTET in the same year. The petitioners' transfers to the aided streams of schools were rejected in 2022 by the authorities on the grounds that they had not obtained TET prior to the last cut-off date of 31st March 2019.
Supreme Court's Key Ruling in Anjuman Case:
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court resolved a long-pending case on the TET requirement. It categorically ruled that:
- In-service teachers have to qualify the TET to remain in service.
- Teachers with less than five years of service remaining as of 1st September 2025 can be permitted to remain without TET till retirement but cannot apply for promotion.
- Teachers with over five years of service leaving shall clear TET in two years, or else they will have to go for compulsory retirement.
- TET is to be equated with a minimum qualification under Section 23 of the RTE Act, not merely as an eligibility condition.
The judgment also made it clear that both TET and CTET will be at par.
Observations by High Court:
The High Court mentioned that although the Supreme Court had dealt primarily with teachers who were appointed prior to when the TET requirement became a must, it had not directly dealt with the situation of teachers who were appointed subsequent to the introduction of the TET rule but obtained the qualification much later.
Following the direction of the Supreme Court's judgment, the High Court held that:
- Teachers who secured TET/CTET prior to the utterance of the Anjuman judgment (1st September 2025), although not prior to 31st March 2019, ought not to be disqualified.
- These teachers can be permitted to continue in service and also be made eligible for promotion since the Supreme Court itself has provided a time window of two years for obtaining the qualification.
This holds good in the case of both TET and CTET.
Court's Directions:
As such, the Court granted the petitions partly, quashing the orders that had refused the teachers' transfers and pay. It instructed the authorities to re-examine their cases, sanction their transfers to aided posts, and provide Shalarth IDs (which are required for salary processing), subject to the condition that there being no other legal obstacles.
But the Court has also made it clear that such protection would not automatically be extended to teachers implicated in the purported 2019 TET exam results scam. Such cases must be examined separately on their own facts.
Conclusion:
The Bombay High Court judgment gives substantial relief to teachers who were awarded TET/CTET on or after the cut-off but prior to the Supreme Court's historic verdict. In reconciling the directions of the Apex Court with realities on the ground, the High Court has ensured that deserving teachers are not unjustifiably relieved of their services, while upholding the sanctity of the TET as an obligatory marker of the teaching profession.
Section 23, Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act - 2009
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009