Case number: Civil Appeal No. 2850 of 2020

 Judges name: Hon’ble Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul J & Aniruddha Bose J & Krishna Murari J.

 Order dated: 12.10.2020

Facts of the case:

The origination of the dispute is Advertisement No. 46, which was issued by respondent No. 2, the Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Service Selection Commission (for short ‘UPHESSC’) in March, 2014 inviting applications for the post of Assistant Professors in various subjects, including ‘Education’. The candidature of appellant No. 2 was rejected on the ground that he did not fulfill the minimum criteria set out by the University Grants Commission (for short ‘UGC’), respondent No. 4, although he had an M.Ed. Degree. This caused the said appellant to approach the High Court by filing Writ-A No. 61 of 2015.

• The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the corrigendum and observed that M.A.(Education) is a master’s degree in the subject while M.Ed is not so, it is only a training qualification. Later, a Special Lave Petition and an appeal to the judgment of the High Court was filed in the Supreme Court.

Issues:

Whether an M.Ed. Degree be treated as an equivalent degree to M.A. (Education) for the purposes of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor?, and even if it was treated as an equivalent, could it be said that an M.Ed. is a post-graduation in the relevant subject?

Supreme Court held:

• The Supreme court held that M.ED is a postgraduate degree and observed that M.Ed qualifies as a master’s programme in Education and is also recognised by the UGC and NCTE. There is no doubt about the M.Ed degree being a post graduate degree, in view of not only what the UGC stated before us, but having promulgated the relevant regulations as far back as 2010 as amended from time to time. The issue of equivalence has been rightly considered by the NCTE and while recognizing some distinct aspects of two degrees, it has clearly stated that for the job of Assistant Professors (Education), both M.A (Education) and M.Ed are eligible.
• The court also observed that, the fact that both M.Ed and M.A (education) degree holders have to take a common test for the purposes of NET is not conclusive but one of the factors to be considered and once the expert body being the NCTE has taken that aspect into consideration apart from other factors to opine the equivalence of the two degrees for the purpose of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Education, it would not be appropriate to take a contra view.

The court set aside the High court judgment and noted that UPHESSC had sought the opinion of the expert panel and then took the decision permitting M.Ed degree as an eligible qualification of appointment. The matters of education must be left to educationists subject to being governed by the relevant statutes and regulations.