Kohima Bench defers hearing on special education teachers’ plea; Nagaland government directed to submit report to Supreme Court by December 15.
DIMAPUR — The Kohima Bench of Gauhati High Court has deferred further hearing of a writ petition filed by 28 contractual special education teachers in Nagaland after being informed that the Supreme Court has directed the state government to continue the process of appointing teachers and to submit a progress report by December 15.
During the hearing on Thursday, the court recorded the submission of the senior government advocate that 34 posts of primary teachers are being converted into special education teacher (primary level) posts and that the process is still underway.
Taking note of the submission, Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia directed the registry to list the matter after December 15.
The petition was filed by 28 contractual Inclusive Education (IE) Resource Persons working under the Samagra Shiksha programme across different districts of Nagaland. The petitioners challenged a notification issued by the directorate of School Education on August 9 inviting applications from contractual special education teachers currently employed under Samagra Shiksha for the purpose of screening.
According to the petitioners, the notification prescribed B.Ed with a one-year diploma in special education or other qualifications requiring a B.Ed degree, while the petitioners, who hold Diploma in Education (Special) recognised by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI), contended that this criterion was not applicable to their level of teaching.
Also read: Court quashes written test in Nagaland Excise Constable recruitment
They argued that as per RCI norms, B.Ed qualification is prescribed only for teachers at the secondary and higher secondary levels, whereas for pre-school, primary and upper primary levels, a diploma in special education is sufficient.
The petitioners also expressed concern that the state government had not yet notified the number of sanctioned posts for special education teachers as required by the Supreme Court’s directions issued on March 7, 2025.
The apex court had directed all states and Union territories to notify the sanctioned number of posts for teachers educating children with special needs, advertise them widely, and conduct recruitment in accordance with RCI qualifications. It had also directed that contractual special educators with long years of service be screened and, if found competent, be regularised with pay parity.
In the first hearing on August 22, the petitioners sought inclusion in the state’s ongoing screening process, expressing apprehension that they might be excluded due to the B.Ed requirement. The High Court allowed the petitioners to file an additional affidavit to place their RCI registration certificates on record and directed the senior government advocate to clarify whether the list of shortlisted candidates had been published.
On August 29, the government informed the court that the shortlist had not yet been released and that verification was still ongoing. The government also stated that more teachers were planned to be recruited for other categories of children with special needs, with eligibility criteria to vary according to requirements. The court then directed the state to file an affidavit detailing these developments by September 17.
When the case came up again on September 22, the High Court recorded that 34 posts had been sanctioned for special education teachers under the August 8 notification. The court was informed that in the second phase, 25 posts of general primary teachers were proposed to be converted into special education teacher posts at the elementary level.
The proposal had been forwarded by the principal director of School Education to the commissioner and secretary of School Education and SCERT on August 25, 2025.
The court noted the petitioners’ contention that the state’s August 8 notification lacked mention of sanctioned posts and that it had not complied with the Supreme Court’s directions to notify and advertise such posts for pre-primary and primary levels.
The matter was then listed for October 17, with the government directed to provide updated information on the conversion of posts and the petitioners to submit any new directions from the Supreme Court in the Rajneesh Kumar Pandey case.
During Thursday’s hearing, the High Court was informed that the Supreme Court had since instructed the Nagaland government to continue the appointment process and to submit a progress report by December 15. Observing that the recruitment process and conversion of posts were ongoing, the Kohima Bench directed that the case be listed after that date for further consideration.