Clarification Issued, Confusion Unresolved: Did Assam Govt Miss the Core Question?

A sweeping recruitment drive for 8,004 Graduate Teachers in Assam’s provincialised secondary schools has plunged into controversy after a significant number of candidates—many of them postgraduates in Mathematics—were rejected on technical grounds. The Directorate of Secondary Education (DSE), Assam, is facing growing criticism over alleged inconsistencies in the application process and eligibility interpretation, prompting questions about transparency, procedural integrity, and administrative accountability.

The Minister's Clarification – A Half Answer?

On Friday, Education Minister Ranoj Pegu attempted to quell the confusion by citing a clarification issued by the Department of School Education. As per the speaking order, the eligibility rule for Graduate Teacher (Mathematics) under the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) Service (Third Amendment) Rules, 2024, requires:

“A candidate must have a Graduation Degree in Science with Honours or Major in Mathematics, and with any one of Physics, Chemistry, or Biology as a pass course or minor subject; or a Postgraduate Degree in Mathematics, along with the same PCB minor requirement, and 50% marks in either graduation or postgraduation.”

While this clarification seemingly settles one point of confusion—i.e., only one of the PCB subjects is required—it still doesn’t address the core grievance raised by the disqualified candidates: Can a candidate with a Postgraduate degree in Mathematics (but without Maths Honours at the undergraduate level) be eligible for the post of Graduate Teacher in Mathematics?

Minister Pegu’s clarification, many argue, is a convenient deflection that doesn’t answer what was actually asked.

𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐮𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐓𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐫 (𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐬) 𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: The School Education Department clarifies that the Rule requires a candidate to have studied 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐏𝐡𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐜𝐬, 𝐂𝐡𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐁𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 as a pass course or… pic.twitter.com/4n1SQaGAJU

— Ranoj Pegu (@ranojpeguassam) July 4, 2025

Candidates Say: “We Were Set Up to Fail”

During the online application process, candidates were posed two pivotal questions:

1. Do you have a Major/Honours in Mathematics at the Graduation level?
   ✅ Some answered “No,” since they did not.

2. Do you have a Postgraduate Degree in Mathematics?
   ✅ “Yes,” many answered truthfully—and were still shown eligible for the post.

This sequence appears to have functioned as a green signal for eligibility—even for those who lacked a Maths Major at UG level but compensated with a PG in the subject, as per the DSE’s own advertised norms.

Yet, during the ongoing document verification process, scores of such candidates have been rejected—many without proper justification. Some were told they are “eligible for Post Graduate Teacher (PGT)” but “not suitable for Graduate Teacher (GT)”, despite the fact that both posts involve teaching Classes 9 and 10.

One disqualified applicant expressed their frustration to Pratidin Time:

“How does it make sense that we’re qualified to teach Class 10 as Post Graduate Teachers, but not as Graduate Teachers? Is this recruitment about qualifications or about ticking boxes on a flawed form?”

Portal Design or Policy Disaster?

The form allowed PG Maths candidates to proceed. The rule also allows it. Yet, rejections continue. So the question arises:

🔍 Did the candidates answer incorrectly?
🔍 Or was the portal designed poorly?

If the system permitted progression based on a PG degree, only to disqualify such candidates later for not having UG Maths Honours—who should bear responsibility? The applicants? Or the recruiters?

DSE's Advertisement Under Fire

According to the original DSE advertisement, the eligibility criteria clearly stated two routes:

1. Graduation in Science with Honours/Major in Maths and PCB as pass/minor,
   OR

2. Postgraduate Degree in Mathematics (with the same PCB minor and 50% marks in UG or PG).

Despite this provision, rejections are being issued solely based on lack of UG Honours, effectively nullifying the PG route—a contradiction that has stunned many.

Degrees in Doubt, Despite Validity

To complicate matters, several rejected candidates were holding valid PG degrees from institutions like IGNOU, KKHSOU, and IDOL (Gauhati University)—which are recognised as per the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised Schools) (Amendment) Rules, 2021. Still, their applications were marked invalid, raising further suspicion over arbitrary rejections.

A Brewing Storm: Legal, Protest Options on the Table

The fallout has been swift. Disqualified candidates have:

• Visited the DSE office in person seeking explanations;

• Organised online protest campaigns highlighting inconsistencies;

• Prepared memoranda and legal notices, demanding re-evaluation.

Many are now questioning whether this was a procedural glitch, a policy misreading, or a systemic failure. What’s clear is that the careers of hundreds now hang in the balance.

“We studied hard, earned our PGs, cleared the cut-off, followed the rules, and still we are told we’re not eligible? This is not just negligence. This feels like betrayal,” said another affected aspirant.

What the Candidates Demand:

1. Immediate review of rejected applications based on both UG and PG pathways.

2. Clarification on how PG-eligible teachers are disqualified for teaching the same classes.

3. Fixing the portal’s flawed logic that led applicants into a false sense of eligibility.

4. Transparent redressal mechanisms for affected candidates.

Conclusion: The Real Lesson in Mismanagement

As Assam’s schools prepare for a new academic cycle, a cloud of confusion hangs over what should have been a milestone recruitment. The candidates—armed with valid degrees, teaching credentials, and hope—now find themselves sidelined by a system that seems either ill-prepared or indifferent.

Until the Directorate of Secondary Education confronts the gaps in its own process and addresses the core issue—not whether candidates studied Biology, but whether they were fairly assessed under the eligibility criteria—the credibility of this recruitment drive will remain in question.

And the question remains:
Were the candidates wrong, or was the system never right to begin with?

Also Read: "Eligible to Teach, But Not Hired": Candidates Slam DSE Over Graduate Teacher Rejections