On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to keep 37,339 assistant teacher (Shiksha Mitras) positions empty, and to fill different posts. A bench of Justices M.M. Shantanagoudar and Vineet Saran stated: “The rest of the posts of assistant instructors other than 37,339 or, as it were, 37,339 posts of assistant educators are to be kept empty and different posts can be filled.”

During the hearing of a request by Uttar Pradesh Prathmik Shiksha Mitra Association testing the May 6 Allahabad High Court request, the heading from the top court was passed, regarding the enlistment of 69,000 assistant teachers.

The top court saw that the filling of remaining posts by restoring to instant assessments was available to the state government.

“By the by, it is borne out, from the first sight, from the records presently being drawn up that the State Government keeps on deciding to fill all the posts and that such a method to be trailed by the State Government isn’t permissible in the light of the interim request passed by this Court on May 21,” the bench said.

The following hearing date on the issue is July 14 and the apex court issued interim orders in May 21 request expressing that all Shiksha Mitras currently holding their situations as assistant educators are not to be upset.

The top court noticed that the parties’ direction had carried it to its notification and it isn’t challenged by anyone that 37,339 people who serve as Shiksha Mitras have appeared for the test.

In the last hearing, the apex court looked for an answer from the Uttar Pradesh government on a group of requests testing the Allahabad High Court decision, which maintained the higher cut-off marks state government choice regarding the arrangement of 69,000 assistant instructors.

The top court additionally looked for clarification from the administration on the adjustment in the requirements of 45% cut-off marks for the general category and 40% for the reserved category, and Uttar Pradesh Prathmik Shiksha Mitra Association and a few different parties documented petitions testing the high court judgment, taking note of that the issue needs point by point hearing.

Senior lawyer Mukul Rohatgi, speaking to Ram Sharan Mauraya, had contended under the watchful eye of the court that the cut-off marks cannot be fixed after the assessment, and this ought to have been done before the assessment was held, and he likewise referred to issues identified with the idea of the agreements and the much of the time made changes to the appointment procedure.

Rohatgi stated that the cut-off alterations were made after the review on January 6, 2019 — 65 percent from 45 percent for the general class and 60 percent from 40 percent for the class reserved.