214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Naveen Kumar and others State of Haryana CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. ASHWANI KUMAR 1. Petitioners (Group C) State Cadre Service Rules, 2012 wherein, Appendix (English) at variance Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) 2. It is contended that the prescription of qualification has to be as per the NCTE regulations and the rules of the State cannot be relied upon deny consideration to the service rules are inconsistent with the NCTE guidelines. 3. It is undisputed that the Rules, 2012, are amended by the Amendment Rules, 2021 and the prescription of qualification has now bee IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-24276 Date of Decision: Naveen Kumar and others V. State of Haryana and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Varun Gupta, DAG, Haryana. *** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral) Petitioners have challenged the Haryana School Education (Group C) State Cadre Service Rules, 2012 wherein, Appendix-B at Sr. No.5 prescribes the qualification for TGT (English) at variance with the regulations framed Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) dated It is contended that the prescription of qualification has to be as per the NCTE regulations and the rules of the State cannot be relied upon eration to the petitioners’ claim for promotion only because the service rules are inconsistent with the NCTE guidelines. It is undisputed that the Rules, 2012, are amended by the Amendment Rules, 2021 and the prescription of qualification has now bee IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 24276-2019 (O&M) ate of Decision: 27.08.2025 …Petitioners …Respondents ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA ROHIT KAPOOR Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Varun Gupta, DAG, Haryana. have challenged the Haryana School Education (Group C) State Cadre Service Rules, 2012 (for short ‘the Rules, 2012’), B at Sr. No.5 prescribes the qualification for TGT lations framed issued by the National dated 29.07.2011. It is contended that the prescription of qualification has to be as per the NCTE regulations and the rules of the State cannot be relied upon to s’ claim for promotion only because the service rules are inconsistent with the NCTE guidelines. It is undisputed that the Rules, 2012, are amended by the Amendment Rules, 2021 and the prescription of qualification has now been have challenged the Haryana School Education , B at Sr. No.5 prescribes the qualification for TGT issued by the National It is contended that the prescription of qualification has to be as to s’ claim for promotion only because the It is undisputed that the Rules, 2012, are amended by the n RAJESH KUMAR 2025.09.02 09:18 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-24276-2019 (O&M) [2] made in consonance with NCTE regulations. In such circumstances, substantial relief claimed by the petitioners has already been granted. 4. We further clarified that once the NCTE regulations are held to be determinative of qualification prescribed for the post, the claim of the petitioners for promotion cannot be non-suited by relying upon the un- amended service rules which were inconsistent with the NCTE guidelines of 2011. Petitioners’ claim for promotion has to be dealt with as per the qualification prescribed in the NCTE regulations, once it has become applicable. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to accord consideration to the petitioner’s claim for promotion, keeping in view the promotion of juniors to the petitioners, in accordance with the NCTE Regulation of 2011 and such claim would not be discarded only because by then Rules of 2012 contained a different prescription of qualification. Required action in this regard would be taken within three months. 6. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) JUDGE (ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE 27.08.2025 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2025.09.02 09:18 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.