Supreme Court sets aside Allahabad HC Verdict; says Education must be left to educationists

We say so in view of the fact that matters of education must be left to educationists, of course subject to being governed by the relevant statutes and regulations. 

While setting aside the Allahabad High Court's 2018 verdict which had held that an MEd qualified person can not be appointed as an assistant professor for the subject of education, the Supreme Court has said that the Education must be left to the educationists. 

The controversy centered around the sole issue of whether an MEd degree can be treated as an equivalent degree to MA (education) for the purposes of appointment to the post of the assistant professor as published in March 2014 by the Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Service Selection Commission (UPHESSC). The UPHESSC took the help of an expert panel of four educationists who opined that for the post of assistant professor (teaching), faculty of arts, the degree of MEd., as well as, the qualification of MA (education) should be accepted.

On July 11, 2016, the employing authority of UPHESSC came out with a corrigendum and allowed candidates who holds two degrees to compete for the posts.

However, a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, on May 14, 2018, opined that while MA (Education) is a master’s degree in the subject concerned, MEd is not so, as it is only a training qualification.

The conclusion reached was that an MEd qualified person could not be appointed to the post of assistant professor in education, and consequently, the corrigendum dated July 11, 2016 was quashed, the High Court had held.

A bench of justices S K Kaul, Aniruddha Bose, and Krishna Murari found fault with the high court’s verdict and set it aside by allowing the appeal of one candidate Anand Yadav.

We say so in view of the fact that matters of education must be left to educationists, of course subject to being governed by the relevant statutes and regulations. It is not the function of this Court to sit as an expert body over the decision of the experts, especially when the experts are all eminent people as apparent from the names as set out, the bench said.

We are, thus, of the view that the impugned judgment is not sustainable and has to be set aside, and the challenge to the corrigendum dated July 11, is repelled. The result having already been computed and awaiting declaration should now be declared forthwith so that persons looking for employment, as per the requisite eligibility criteria, can be employed, and so that the students have the benefit of education from the persons so employed, it said.

Read More:

• Delhi High Court directs DU to release Postgraduate result by October 31; Check details here
• Microsoft, AICTE collaborates to empower learners, educators in new-age tech