TET Mandate Shouldn't Apply To Teachers Appointed Before 2010 : Tamil Nadu Govt's Review Plea In Supreme Court

The Tamil Nadu Government has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court against the recent judgment which mandated Teachers' Eligibility Test (TET) qualification for teachers.

The judgment, delivered on September 1, held that even teachers who were appointed before the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) must acquire TET qualification within two years, if they have more than five years of service leftt.

In the review petition, the State argued that the mandate applies only to teachers appointed under the relaxed norms notified after the Act came into effect on 1.4.2010, and not to those who were validly appointed prior to the Act under existing service rules.

The petition challenges the interpretation of Section 23 of the RTE Act, which mandates that teachers acquire the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) qualification within five years of the Act coming into force.

It submits that Section 23(1) is an independent clause, dealing with future recruitments, while Section 23(2) specifically addresses the contingency of a shortage of trained teachers, permitting the Central Government to grant temporary relaxation of minimum qualifications for up to five years.

The review plea highlights that the proviso to Section 23(2) - which says that those not possessing the qualification must acquire the same within five years- is referable only to appointments made during the relaxation period, not to pre-2010 recruits. Interpreting it otherwise, the petition contends, would retrospectively disqualify thousands of teachers, contrary to legislative intent and service law principles.

It is pointed out that several States, including Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Odisha, had availed relaxation under Section 23(2) in view of inadequate teacher training institutions. In Tamil Nadu alone, the government employs 4,49,850 teachers, of whom 3,90,458 are not TET-qualified. If the impugned directions are implemented, the plea warns, the entire system faces “imminent collapse,” with mass disqualification of teachers and denial of classroom instruction to millions of children, thereby infringing Article 21A of the Constitution guaranteeing the right to education.

The petition also invokes the principle of proportionality, arguing that while improving teaching standards is a legitimate aim, imposing TET retrospectively on pre-2010 appointees is manifestly disproportionate. Instead, less intrusive alternatives such as in-service training, refresher courses, and bridging programs could improve quality without destabilizing livelihoods or disrupting education delivery.

The plea therefore urges the Court to clarify that the five-year TET mandate applies only prospectively to appointments made after 1.4.2010 under relaxed norms, and not to teachers who were already serving before the Act commenced.

"Even if the objective of enhancing teaching quality is accepted as legitimate, compelling pre-2010 appointees to pass TET on pain of disqualification is manifestly disproportionate. Be that as it may the time period of two years will be telling on the quality of education to be imparted on the children as the affected teachers will be concentrating themselves to qualify the TET. On the contrary less intrusive alternatives, such as in-service training, capacity building, refresher courses, or bridging programs, would achieve the same goal without extinguishing livelihoods and destabilizing the education system," the review petition stated.

The review petition has been filed through Sabarish Subramanian AoR and was Settled by Senior Advocate P. Wilson.