In Brief
A teacher challenged the annulment of his appointment as an Intermediate Trained Assistant Teacher based on allegations that he had disclosed different caste categories in his TET examination certificate (MBC) versus his actual caste certificate and the recruitment process (BC). The Supreme Court upheld his appointment, holding that discrepancies in caste information that do not affect examination eligibility or confer undue advantage cannot justify termination. Since cutoff marks were identical for both categories and the teacher secured higher merit-based marks than competing candidates, the High Court erred in setting aside the appointment. The Court ruled that alleged incorrect information in qualification examinations, unsupported by evidence of manipulation, cannot override merit-based selection."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.