9ஆம் வகுப்பு கிராமப்புற மாணவர்களுக்கான ஊரகத்திறனாய்வுத் தேர்வு (TRUST Examination)அறிவிப்பு வெளியீடு!!!

9ஆம் வகுப்பு கிராமப்புற மாணவர்களுக்கான ஊரகத்திறனாய்வுத் தேர்வு (TRUST Examination)அறிவிப்பு வெளியீடு!!!

Trust Exam Notification

ஊடகப்பிரிவு தமிழ்நாடு பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு

ஆசிரியர்களை பாதுகாக்கும் வகையில் டெட் தேர்வு தொடர்பாக உச்ச நீதிமன்றத்தில் சீராய்வு மனு தாக்கல் - TNGTF மாநில மையம்

அனைவருக்கும் வணக்கம் மாவட்ட பொறுப்பாளர்கள் காணொளி வழிக் கூட்டத்தில் அறிவித்தவாறு  மாநில அமைப்பானது ஆசிரியர்களை பாதுகாக்கும் வகையில் டெட் தேர்வு தொடர்பாக உச்சநீதிமன்ற தீர்ப்பை எதிர்த்து மேல்முறையீடு செய்வதற்கு தேவையான ஆவணங்களை, அரசாணைகளை   மாநில பொதுச் செயலாளர் பேட்ரிக் ரெய்மாண்ட் அவர்கள் தலைமையில் மதுரையில் இன்று வழக்கறிஞரை நேரில் சந்தித்து வழங்கினார்கள். வழக்கினை நடத்துவதற்காக முதல் கட்ட தவணையாக இயக்கத்தின் சார்பில் ரூபாய் 50,000 இன்று வழக்கறிஞரிடம் வழங்கப்பட்டது. இந்நிகழ்வில் மாநில பொறுப்பாளர்கள் பாரதி வளனரசு மற்றும் அந்தோணிசாமி உடன் இருந்தனர். உச்ச நீதிமன்றத்தில் சீராய்வு மனு தாக்கல் செய்ய தேவையான நடவடிக்கைகளை மாநில அமைப்பு மேற்கொண்டு வருகிறது என்பதை தெரிவித்துக் கொள்கிறோம். 

மாநில மையம் TNGTF

ஊடகப்பிரிவு தமிழ்நாடு பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு

Why Supreme Court's TET ruling is a hard lesson for teachers

The ruling created concerns among lakhs of teachers who will need to pass the test if they want to keep their jobs

In a landmark ruling with sweeping implications for India’s school education system, the Supreme Court recently made it mandatory for in-service teachers of Classes 1 to 8 in non-minority schools to clear the Teachers’ Eligibility Test (TET) within two years. The court held that its ruling applies even to those appointed before the TET mandate was introduced in 2011. This means lakhs of teachers working in government, aided, and private schools will have to pass the test if they want to keep their jobs. Failure to comply will result in compulsory retirement with terminal benefits, according to the SC’s order. Only those who have less than five years until retirement are exempt from taking the test. But they won’t be eligible for promotions without TET. All fresh appointments will have TET as a mandatory requirement.

Right to Education

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education, commonly referred to as the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, made education up to 14 years of age a fundamental right under Article 21A of the Constitution. It created the need to ensure minimum teaching standards for Classes I to VIII. For this, Section 23 of the Act empowered the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to prescribe qualifications for teachers, and in 2010 the Council issued notifications making the qualifications mandatory for appointment in government, aided, and private schools.

NCTE guidelines in 2011 germinated the TET to establish a uniform national benchmark for teacher quality, replacing the earlier system in which recruitment rules varied across states. This raised a key question: should teachers appointed before 2011 also be required to pass the TET to continue in service or to qualify for promotions? The issue became more complex in 2014, when the Supreme Court held that minority institutions were exempt from the Right to Education Act in the Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust case. The exemption had, until now, at least partially shielded them from the TET requirement -- a matter reopened in the current proceedings.

Legal challenges

The two central questions -- whether the TET applies to minority institutions and whether pre-2011 teachers must clear it -- led to multiple petitions in various high courts resulting in conflicting decisions.

The Bombay High Court in September 2017 ruled that the TET is mandatory for minority institutions, but the Madras High Court in 2023 held that it is not mandatory for in-service teachers appointed before July 2011, especially considering that the TET doesn’t guarantee employment besides its low pass rate. In another case, the Madurai division bench of Madras High Court ruled that the TET is mandatory for appointment in all educational institutions, including minority institutions in April 2025.

 One issue settled, another pending

The Supreme Court, in its latest ruling, said its order will remain outside the purview of minority schools till a larger bench takes its call. The Supreme Court's recent judgment settled a key question: all the teachers in-service, even those appointed before 2011, must mandatorily clear the TET to continue in service and appointment. It said that the TET is not only a mandatory eligibility requirement but a constitutional necessity stemming from the right to quality education.

On the question of minority-run schools, the court noted that they can't be automatically exempt from TET requirements and expressed doubts over the correctness of the Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust case judgment. Since the issue involves Constitutional interpretation of different articles, the court referred it to a larger bench for final adjudication, leaving open the possibility of future clarification on the extent to which minority schools must comply with RTE Act.

Impact on Tamil Nadu

The SC ruling created concerns among teachers appointed before 2011 in government, aided, and private schools in Tamil Nadu. The state’s school education minister, Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi, said around 1.7 lakh government teachers would be affected. Additionally, many teachers in private schools don’t have the TET.

While NCTE guidelines recommend conducting the TET at least once a year, Tamil Nadu has held it only six times since 2012, plus a special Paper II examination in 2014. Across these exams, 37,28,435 candidates appeared but only 1,67,985 (4.5%) managed to pass. This raises serious concerns about whether the 2.5 lakh teachers without TET can clear the exam within two years.

The TN education minister held talks with teachers associations and education department officials about the implications of the SC ruling. The options that emerged include seeking a legal review, approaching the Union government for a solution, or conducting a special TET for in-service teachers.

While the first two options might lead to a legal solution, conducting a special TET for teachers could raise eyebrows. According to the Teachers’ Recruitment Board (TRB) website, only around 32,000 TET-qualified teachers are employed in government service. Members of the TET Passed Candidates Welfare Association said such a special test would bend the rules for a specific group, undermining the credibility of the examination as a standard benchmark for teacher eligibility.

“We have the required qualification for TET, having cracked the examination with a very low pass rate. However, the government now says we will have to pass the TRB examination again to secure employment, even as thousands of vacancies in government schools remain unfilled. Now, the government is considering bending the rules, potentially compromising quality. How is that fair?” asked V Ravi, coordinator of the association.

Meanwhile, various teachers’ associations argue that retrospectively implementing a benchmark examination is unfair. “We have been teaching for years, and there was no requirement to pass the TET when we joined service. We have ensured quality education so far. Forcing us to retire or denying promotions now is unfair and the government has to take a decision on this,” said R Doss, general secretary, Elementary School Teachers' Association.

Minority question

The Supreme Court looked at whether the RTE Act applies to minority schools and highlighted the conflict between two rights - Article 21A gives every child aged 6-14 the right to free and compulsory education, while Article 30(1) allows minorities to run schools that preserve their religion or language. In the Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust case, the court had said that the rule requiring private schools to reserve 25% of seats for disadvantaged children does not apply to minority schools. The recent judgment questioned this, suggesting that even if the reservation seems to conflict with Article 30, it could be applied to children from the same minority community who are disadvantaged or from weaker sections in the local area.

The court also said that rules to maintain education quality do not take away a school’s minority character, adding they are necessary to ensure children get proper education. Declaring TET inapplicable to minority schools could violate Article 14 (Right to Equality), which forbids unfair treatment based on religion or language, as well as Article 21A. The judgment has, therefore, opened the discussion on whether the RTE Act, including the 25% seat reservation and TET rules for teachers, applies to minority schools, which is expected to be decided by a larger bench.

In suggesting a review of the 2014 Pramati verdict, the two-judge bench was conscious that it was critiquing a judgment of a Constitution bench comprising Ibrahim Kalifulla, Dipak Misra, Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, A K Patnaik and R M Lodha, clarifying it did not intend to violate judicial discipline. It opined that the 2014 verdict erroneously focused on Section 12(1)(c) of the RTE Act and no other section and held the entirety of the RTE Act to be inapplicable to an entire section of society, excluding them from the idea of nation building by providing education to children at the grassroots level.

ஊடகப்பிரிவு தமிழ்நாடு பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு

இன்று(16/09/2025) நமது கல்வி அமைச்சர் அவர்களின் செய்தியாளர் சந்திப்பு.*

ஊடகப்பிரிவு தமிழ்நாடு பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு

TET தேர்வு குறித்து பள்ளிக் கல்வித் துறை அமைச்சர் அவர்களின் இன்றைய (9.9.2025) பேட்டி.

TET தேர்வு குறித்து பள்ளிக் கல்வித் துறை அமைச்சர் அவர்களின் இன்றைய (9.9.2025) பேட்டி.

ஊடகப்பிரிவு தமிழ்நாடு பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு

TET தேர்வு குறித்து பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு பொது செயலாளர் டாக்டர் பேட்ரிக் ரெய்மான்ட் அவர்களின் ஊடக பேட்டி

ஊடகப்பிரிவு தமிழ்நாடு பட்டதாரி ஆசிரியர் கூட்டமைப்பு