Telangana High Court
G. Sucharitha vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others on 17 March, 2025
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.7442 of 2023
ORDER:
Heard Sri V.V. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned Government
Pleader for Services-I, appearing on behalf of respondent
Nos.1 to 4.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer
as under:
"...to declare the action of the Respondents in not
considering the case of the Petitioner for admission and
absorption in grant-in-aid post inspite of the
recommendation made by the 3rd Respondent to the 2nd
Respondent vide Lr. No. 6840/E4/2013, dated 27-07-2013
as illegal and contrary to law and against Articles 14 and 16
of the Constitution of India and in consequence thereof
direct the Respondents to pay salary to the Petitioner herein
by approving the post in grant-in-aid from the date of
recommendation made by the 3rd Respondent to the 2nd
Respondent with all consequential benefits by issuing Writ
of Mandamus or any other Writ and pass...".
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner was
initially appointed as SGT in the 4th respondent school on
07.10.2003. The petitioner has been working from 2003 and is
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
eligible to be appointed as SGT in the 4th respondent School in
grant-in-aid category but the same is not being considered by
respondent No.2, consequently the petitioner had been deprived
of equal pay on par with other SGTs, who are working in the
regular schools. Owing to inaction on the part of the 2nd
respondent in not admitting and absorbing the post of the
petitioner in grant-in-aid, the petitioner approached the Court by
filing the present writ petition.
PERUSED THE RECORD.
4. The relevant portion of the Proceedings Lr.No.
684/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013 of the respondent No.3
addressed to the respondent No.2 is extracted hereunder:
"The Management of the school has filed Writ
Petition in the Hon'ble Court vide W.P. No. 18144 of
2013 to settle the long pending issue of sanctioning of
Grant-In-Aid for all eligible posts with immediate effect.
The following teachers were approved by the
competent authority.
Name of the Teacher Cadre Date of
Sl. appointment
No.
1. Mrs. K. Kanya Kumari HPT-II 07-10-2003
2. Mr. K. Srikanth TPT-II 07.10.2003
3. Smt. G. Sucharita SGT 07.10.2003
4. P. Raja Narsu SGT 03.11.2003
5. P. Madhusudan Rao SGT 17.11.2003
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
The above approved appointments are made
prior to the ban dated i.e. 20.10.2004 are eligible
for admission into Grant-In-Aid, which is
supported by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
judgment dated 6.9.2011 in SLP No.9541/2007".
Further, I submit that as per the interim
orders in W.P.M.P. No. 12425/2002 in W.P. No.
10123/2003, this office was submitted the
proposals for approval of appointments in
unaided into aided posts vide under reference 1st
cited for the above 5 posts.
In view of the above, I am submitting herewith
the proposals for unaided to aided posts submitted by
the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Amberpet Mandal for
further course of action".
5. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner's
name is mentioned at Serial Number 3 in the approval list
recommended by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 vide
Lr.No.6840/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013 and it is specifically
stated in the said approval list recommended by respondent No.3
to the respondent No.2 that appointment of petitioner along with
four others had been made prior to ban dated 20.10.2004 and
therefore, the petitioner is eligible for admission into Grant-In-
Aid, which is supported by the Supreme Court judgment dated
06.09.2011 in SLP No. 9541/2007.
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
6. A bare perusal of the proceedings dated 27.07.2013
(referred to and extracted above), further clearly indicates that as
per the interim orders in W.P.M.P. No. 12425/2002 in W.P. No.
10123/2003 proposal's had been submitted by the respondent
No.3 to the respondent No.2 for approval of appointments in
unaided into aided posts in respect of five posts which includes
the post of the petitioner in the category of SGT from the date of
appointment 07.10.2003 vide this office Lr.Rc.No.4065/C7/2005,
dated 18.12.2003.
7. Counter affidavit had been filed on behalf of the respondent
No.3 and at para No.9 it is clearly admitted that there had been a
recommendation in favour of the petitioner vide Proceedings
dated 27.07.2013 of the 3rd respondent addressed to the 2nd
respondent herein and the said issue is being dealt separately by
the department in accordance to law. The relevant para Nos.5, 6
and 9 of the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder:
"5. It is submitted that the Sri Sai Vignana Vardhini
Vidhyalayam Upper Primary School (English Medium)
submitted proposals for admission of post into Grant in
aid during 2003. The Government have convened High
Level Committee and as per the recommendations of
the High Level Committee have sanctioned Grant in aid
posts to the eligible (30) schools in G.O.Ms.No. 143,
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
Edn. (PS.2) Dept., dated 16.12.2003. Out of the said
(30) schools, (1) post of School Assistant was
sanctioned to the Sri Sai Vignana Vardhini Vidhyalam
Upper Primary School (English Medium) and the same
has been implemented and one teacher approved in
the aided post is working.
6. It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed as
unaided by the management as Secondary Grade
Teacher and there is no sanctioned aided post of
Secondary Grade Teacher in the said school. It is
already held by the Hon'ble Courts, the appointments
made and the individuals continued to be considered
only if they are appointed against a sanctioned post.
In the instant case, there is no sanctioned aided post of
Secondary Grade Teacher in the said school".
"9. It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted
with regard to the proposal for admission into Grant-in-
aid of Sri Sai Vignana Vardhini Vidhyalayam Upper
Primary School (English Medium) by the 3rd respondent
vide Lr.No. 6840/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013. The
said issue is being dealt separately by the
department in accordance with law".
8. Taking into consideration :
(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
case,
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
(b) The submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned
Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing on behalf of
respondent Nos.1 to 4,
(c) The averments made in the counter affidavit
filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 in particular para
Nos.5, 6 and 9 (referred to and extracted above),
(d) The contents of the recommendation made in
favour of the petitioner by the respondent No.3 to the
respondent No.2 vide Lr.No.6840/E4/2013, dated
27.07.2013,
(e) The fact that the office of the District
Educational Officer, Hyderabad had submitted proposals
for approval of appointments in unaided into aided posts
for the post of SGT category, who had been appointed on
07.10.2003 vide letter of the office of the District
Educational Officer, Hyderabad Lr.Rc.No.4065/C7/2005,
dated 18.12.2003,
The writ petition is disposed of directing the
respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein to consider the case of the
petitioner for admission into Grant-In-Aid post as per the
recommendation made by the 3rd respondent to the
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
respondent No.2 vide Lr.No.6840/E4/2013, dated
27.07.2013 (referred to and extracted above), and as per
the proposal submitted by the office of the District
Educational Officer, Hyderabad District for approval of
petitioner's post in the category of SGT into Grant-In-Aid,
within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order and pass appropriate orders duly
considering the case of the petitioner for admission and
absorption in grant-in-aid post and duly communicate the
decision to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to
costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if
any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________
MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
Date: 17.03.2025
Skj
