Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Vantharam Maheswar Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 21 June, 2024

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH                AMARAVATI
                        (Special Original Jurisdiction)
                  FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JUNE
                    TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR ^
                                   PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
                     WRIT PETITION NO: 47621 OF 2018
 Between:

    1. Sri Lakshmipathi Swamy Vari Vidya Vihar Oriental          High School,
       Pedamuttevi Village, Movva Mandal Krishna District Rep by its
       Correspondent Sri MVLN Sitaram, S/o. Sri Muttevi Desikendu
    2. Sri Muttevi Gaura Krishna S/o Late M. Venkatappa Lakshmi Narasimma
       Sitaram, aged about 39 years, Pedamuttevi, Krishna District, Rep. by its
       Correspondent, Sri Lakshmi Swamy Vidyavihar Sanskrit Orient High
       School, Pedamuttevi(V), Movva (M), Krishna District
       (P2 is brought on record to represent the writ petitioner institution
      as Correspondent as per the CO dt10.05.2024 vide orders passed
      in lA No.01 of 2024) '
                                                               ...PETITIONER
                                     AND

   1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Special Chief Secretary, Dept of
      School Education Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravathi Andhra
      Pradesh

   2. The Commissioner of School Education, Ibrahimpatnam Vijayawada
      Amaravathi Andhra Pradesh.

   3. The District Education Officer, Machilipatnam Krishna District Andhra
      Pradesh.

                                                           ...RESPONDENTS

       Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the
       nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents
'^authorities in not permitting the filling of teaching posts in petitioner
11 institution as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3rd
 S:

  |-p#pndent to accord permission to the petitioner school to undertake the
  .selection process on par with other oriental schools in terms of the Lr Rc
      No. 230/PS-1/2012 dated 30.07.2018 of the of the 2"^^ respondent and
  reimburse the salaries paid to the staff till now while making it dear that
  the authorities can not sit over the proposals which will lead to closure of
  the institution.

  lA NO: 1 OF 2018

           Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
  stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court
  may be pleased to strike down the rider in the order dated 21.04.2017 of
  the 2"^^ respondent and consequently direct the 3^*^ respondent to permit the
  petitioner school to undertake the appointment of teaching posts in the
  petitioner institution pending disposal of the main writ petition.


  Counsel for the Petitioner No.1: SRI K. S. MURTHY
  Counsel for the Petitioner No.2: SR PONNADA SREE VYAS
  Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
  The Court made the following: ORDER
 APHC010988022018

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                               AT AMARAVATI                 [3333]
                        (Special Original Jurisdiction)

             FRIDAY .THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JUNE
                   TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                               PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

                     WRIT PETITION NO: 47621/2018

Between:


Sri Lakshmipathi Swamy Vari Vidya Vihar Oriental ...PETITIONER{S )
High School and another

                                 AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others           ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
   1.KS MURTHY

   2.PONNADA SREE VYAS

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

   1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP)
The Court made the following:
                                              2

                                                                                 (VS,J
                                                                 W.P.No.47621of 2018)


ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondents in not permitting the filling up of teaching posts in the petitioner- institution, as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3''^ respondent to accord permission to the petitioner school to undertake the selection process on par with other oriental schools in terms of the Lr.No.230/PS-1/2012, dated 30.07.2018 of the 2^ respondent and reimburse the salaries paid to the staff till now while making it clear that the authorities cannot sit over the proposals which will lead to closure of the institution and to pass

2. Heard Sri K.S.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School Education for the

respondents.

3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the

petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is

squarely covered by the order, dated 05.01.2023 passed by this

Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch and requested to pass a I

(VS,J W.P.No.47621of 2018)

similar order in this Writ Petition also. The same is not disputed by

the learned Government Pleader for School Education appearing for

the respondents. The operative portion of the said order, reads as

under:

9. In view of the above stand taken by the Government, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of with the following directions :

i) The respondent-authorities are hereby directed to permit the petitioners-institutions to fill up all the Aided vacancies in terms of G.O.Ms.No.l, Education, dated 01.01.1994 and also as per the Schedule prescribed under Sections 19 & 25 of the Act,2009;

ii) In future also, whenever vacancies arise, the institutions have to make applications to the Competent authorities for filling up the vacancies ; in) On such applications, the Competent authorities shall inform the institution about the availability of qualified surplus staf,f within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of application and allot said surplus staff on permanent basis;

iv) If surplus staff are not available, the Competent authority shall inform the same and permit the petitioners-institutions to fill up the vacancies in accordance with the above said Rule, preferably within a period of two (02) months ;

V) So far as minority institutions are concerned, the above procedure is not applicable insofar as allotment of surplus staff are concerned, in view of the Judgments of Division Bench of this Court rendered in Modem High School, Zamisthanpur V. Goxjernment of Andhra Pradesh and Others^ and Ester Axene Res. High School and Others V. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others^.

ui) The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondent-authorities within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

'2002(1) ALD 96 ^ MANU/AP/0045/2019

(VSJ W.P.No.47621of2018)

4. In view of the same, for the, reasons alike in the

aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also disposed of, in terms of the order, dated 05.01.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch. There shall be no order as to costs.

Registry is directed to attach the copy of the order, dated 05.01.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch to this order. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

SD/- K. KAS/Rao ACHAR/ //TRUE COPY// ass/stantreg/st^/ To.

1. The Special Chief Secretary, Dept of School Education, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravathi Andhra Pradesh

2. The Commissioner of School Education, Ibrahimpatnam Vijayawada Amaravathi Andhra Pradesh.

3. The District Education Officer, Machilipatnam Krishna District Andhra Pradesh.

4. One CC to Sri K. S. Murthy, Advocate [OPUC]

5. One CC to Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, Advocate[OPUC]

6. Two CCs to GP for School Education, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

[OUT]

7. Three CD Copies.

(Along with a copy of order dated 05.01.2023 in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 & batch to this Order) ssb HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

Writ Petition Nos.30927. 2888, 4938, 8014. 8197, 30548, 31010, 31039. 31730. 33163. 35592. 37415. 37467, 37508. 38250. 38924. 40923 and 42367 of 2022

COMMON ORDER;-

As the issue involved in all these writ petitions is inter-related,

all these writ petitions are taken up together and are disposed of i through this common order.

2. The petitioners in these cases are the management of

private Schools. The grievance of the writ petitioners in all these Writ

Petitions is the action of the official respondents in not permitting the

petitioners-institutions to fill up the vacant aided posts in their

institutions in accordance with law.

3. Facts in nutshell:

All the petitioners-institutions are private aided schools.

All the institutions got recognition and thereafter, some posts have

admitted into Grant-in-aid by the Government. The appointment of

staff in the Aided institutions is governed by Rule-12 of G.O.Ms.No.1,

Education, dated 01.01.1994. As per the terms in the said G.O., as and

when vacancy arises, the Management shall make an application to the

Competent authority, who in turn would grant permission to the

Management to constitute staff selection committee consisting of nominee of District Educational Officer (DEO) as well as the subject experts. Thereafter, the Management is free to make appoint from among the selected candidates after following procedure of giving notification in newspaper and also drafting the candidates from concerned employment exchange.

(h-) Subsequently, the government issued a memo, dated 20.10.2004 imposing i ban on recruitment of staff into Aided institutions, i Thereafter, batch of Writ Petitions were filed i •e., W.P.No.9503 of 2005 and batch.

After elaborate hearing, all the writ petitions were allowed and the ban imposed i by the State government was set aside.

^ide common order, dated 30.07.2013. filed Writ Thereafter, the Government Appeal No.216 of 2014, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court.

Subsequently, the Government preferred appeal in S.L.P.No.8547 India, which of 20,4 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of was also dismissed on ,4.09.20,5. As there ISi no other go, the Government issued i memo, vide Memo No. 18836/SC. PS/A1/2012, dated 04.01.2017 permitting the Aided Institutions, who approached the Court to fill up the vacant posts by lifting the ban. (hi) Subsequently, the government i School Education issued G.O.Ms.No.40, (PS) Department, dated 30.06.2017 and as per the

said G.O., the Commissioner of School Education has issued

proceedings in Rc.No.90/PS-1/2010-3, dated 20.07.2017 directing all

the Regional Joint Directors of School Education and District

Educational Officers to take necessary action in filling up all the

vacancies in the schools. As per the said G.O., and consequential nd proceedings of the 2 respondent, dated 20.07.2017, all the

petitioners-institutions requested the Competent authorities to permit

them to fill up the vacant posts and to that effect, they made

applications on various dates to the respective competent authorities.

(iv) Subsequently, as per the instructions of the Government,

the 2"'^ respondent once again issued proceedings, dated 12.09.2017 keeping the recruitment in abeyance. Subsequently, the said

proceedings were challenged in W.P.No.1041 of 2018 and this Court

suspended the said abeyance proceedings, vide orders in I.A.No.1 of

2018 in W.P.No.1041 of 2018, dated 29.02.2020. Thereafter, all the

petitioners-institutions made several applications to the Competent

authorities seeking permission to fill up vacancies in Aided Schools.

Till now, the Competent authorities did not take any decision or

granted permission to fill the vacancies in Aided Schools. Aggrieved by

the same, all these writ petitioners have come up with the batch of

Writ Petitions.

4. Perused the entire material on record. This Court has also

passed interim orders in most of the Writ Petitions directing the Competent authorities to permit the petitioners-lnstitutions to fill up vacancies in Aided Schools by considering the proposal submitted by them. In spite of interim orders, the Competent authorities have not permitted the petitioners-lnstitutions to fill up the vacancies.

Consequently, some of the petitioners-lnstitutions filed contempt cases before this Court and they are pending.

5. Learned Government Pleader for School Education filed counter-affidavit, inter alia contending that Aided schools should

maintain teacher-student ratio as 1:40 for filling up of vacancies and

that the petitioners-lnstitutions have to fill up vacancies in Aided schools as per the provisions prescribed under Rule 12(3)(A) of G.p.Ms.No.1, Education (PS2) Department, dated 01.01.1994.

6. Sri N.Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel, scrupulously submitted that so far as the contention of the official respondents with

regard to teacher-student ratio is concerned, the same is governed by the schedule prescribed under Sections 19 & 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short, 'the Act of extracted 2009). For better appreciation, the said Schedule is hereunder:

the schedule (See Sections 19 and 25 ) Norms and Standards for a School SI.No. Item Norms and Standards

Number of teachers Admitted children Number of teachers

(a) For FirstTup to Sixty Two class to 5"'

Class Between sixty-one to ninety Three

Between Ninety one to one Four hundred and twenty Between one hundred and Five twenty one to two hundred

Above one hundred and fifty Five Plus one Children Head Teacher

Above two hundred Children Pupil-Teacher Ratio (excluding Head Teacher) shall not exceed

(b) For Sixth forty.

                                 (1)At least
              class      to                               one teacher per
              eight class
                                        class so that there shall be
                                        at least one teacher each
                                        for-
                                               (i)     Science           and
                                                       Mathematics ;
                                               (ii) Social Studies ;
                                               (iii) Languages

                                (2) At least one teacher for
                                      every thirty-five children
                                (3)        Where admission of
                                 children            is        above    one
                                 hundred--
                                      (i)   A full             time    head
                                                           teacher
                                  (ii)      Part time instructors
                                                 for
                                               (A) Art Education
                                               (B) Health               and
                                                   Physical
                                                       Education
                                            (C)      Work Education

7. As such this being the Central Enactment, the State

government is bound to follow the said Schedule. Further, so far as

Rule-12(3)(A) of the Rules, 1993 is concerned, the petitioner-

institutions have no objection to follow the Rule 12(3)(A) of the

Rules, 1993. For better appreciation of the said provision, the same is extracted hereunder:

12.Appointment of Staff

"Rule 12(3A) : Before filling up of the aided teaching or non-teaching posts, the educational agency shall necessarily obtain clearance from the Competent authority, to the effect that, there are no surplus posts in the concerned district, and if there are suitable surplus candidates, they should be deployed against the said vacancies as per the subject requirements, The

competent authority shall however obtain the permission from the Government before issuing clearance for filling up ofany aided posts

8. As per Rule 12 (3A) of the above said Rules, vacancies will

be filled up by surplus candidates. At this juncture, learned Senior

Counsel states that respondent authorities are not sending surplus

candidates and they are sending candidates only by way of adjustment

and thereafter, recalling them, which happened in many cases. At this

juncture, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to

inform the stand of the Government with regard to sub-rule 3(A) of

Rule 12. In such circumstances, learned Government Pleader filed

affidavit of the Commissioner of School Education. Para-5 of the said

affidavit reads as follows :

Further to submit that instructions were

issued to all the Regional Joint Directors of

School Education and District Educational

Officers with a request to identify the

surplus teachers/ existing teachers of

defunct aided schools as per Rule 10(12) in

G.O.Ms.No.l, Education, dated 01.01.1994

and transfer the surplus teachers as per

Rule 10 (17) in G.O.Ms.No.l, Education,

dated 01.01.1994 on a permanent basis

and the same is under process".

9. In view of the above stand taken by the Government, all

the Writ Petitions are disposed of with the following directions :

i) The respondent-authorities are hereby directed to permit

the petitioners-institutions to fill up all the Aided

vacancies in terms of G.O.Ms.No.l, Education, dated

01.01.1994 and also as per the Schedule prescribed under

Sections 19 & 25 of the Act, 2009 ;

ii) In future also, whenever vacancies arise, the institutions

have to make applications to the Competent authorities

for filling up the vacancies ;

iii) On such applications, the Competent authorities shall

inform the institution about the availability of qualified

surplus staff, within a period of four (04) weeks from the

date of application and allot said surplus staff on

permanent basis ;

iv) If surplus staff are not available, the Competent authority

shall inform the same and permit the petitioners-

institutions to fill up the vacancies in accordance with the

above said Rule, preferably within a period of two (02)