[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Mohd. Mustafa Ali, Warnagal vs The Govt. Of A.P. Hyderabad And 4 Others on 25 March, 2026

      IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
                         HYDERABAD

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

             Dated this the 25th day of March, 2026

               WRIT PETITION No.22687 of 2006

Between:

Mohd. Mustafa Ali                                     .. Petitioner

                               AND

The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its
Secretary, Education (SE.PS.I) Department, Secretariat,
Hyderabad and four others.
                                                 .. Respondents
ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed to set aside the Memo

No.1175/PS.I/A2/2003, dated 13.02.2006, and consequently

to declare that the petitioner is entitled to be absorbed in the

grant in aid post of Secondary Grade Teacher, which he has

been holding with effect from 17.09.1998 in the 5th respondent

High School with all consequential benefits.

2. Heard Ms. Mukkera Sahithi Sri Kavya, learned counsel

for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School

Education appearing for the respondents. Perused the record.

3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

(a) Petitioner was originally appointed as a Secondary

Grade Teacher in an un-aided post on 16.06.1986 in the 5th

respondent. As on that date, G.O.Ms.No. 524 Education, dated

20.12.1988 was not in existence. There were no rules at all

governing the un-aided post at the time when the petitioner

was appointed as a Selection Grade Teacher in the 5th

respondent. Moreover, the School in which, petitioner is

working is a Minority Institution. The Minority Institution need

not seek approval for all appointments made in the un-aided

posts. The petitioner is fully eligible and qualified to hold the

post of a Secondary Grade Teacher.

(b) While so, one Sri Mohd. Alluddin Sanjari, who was

working as a Secondary Grade Teacher in a Grant-in-aid post

in the 5th respondent High School, was promoted as a School

Assistant, which is a Grant-in-aid post with effect from

01.09.1998 and the same was also approved by the Regional

Joint Director of School Education, Warangal, vide Proceeding

Rc.No.3687/B1/2000 dated 02.01.2002. As the post of

Secondary Grade Teacher (Grant-in-aid) fell vacant to avoid

dislocation of work, the Management of the 5th respondent High

School by its proceedings in Rc.No.Wpl/98-99, dated

16.09.1998 posted the petitioner to Grant-in-aid post of

Secondary Grade Teacher as per resolution of the Managing

Committee of the 5th respondent High School. Accordingly, the

petitioner joined in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher

(Grant-in-aid) on 17.09.1998.

District Educational Officer, Warangal, vide its

Lr.No.1/Spl/1998-99, dated 17.09.1998 to ratify the action

taken by it. The Regional Joint Director of School Education,

Warangal, by his Letter in Rc.No.8358/B1/2001, dated

03.01.2002 recommended the petitioner's case to the

Commissioner & Director of School Education, who in turn

recommended the Government by Lr.Rc.No.3354/D33/02

dated 15.01.2003.

(d) As stated supra, petitioner's appointment to the un-

aided post was prior to issuance of G.O.Ms.No.524. Therefore,

securing prior approval of the competent authority as per

GO.Ms.No.524 does not arise. The Government by Memo

No.1175/PS.I/A2/2003 dated 13.02.2006 rejected the proposal

of the Director of School Education for the petitioner's being

absorbed in the aided post of Secondary Grade Teacher in 5th

respondent High School.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

impugned Memo does not disclose as to what action of the

Management was not in accordance with the rules. Due to

exigencies of service and to avoid dislocation of work, the

petitioner is now being continued in the grant-in-aid post, but

the petitioner is not allowed to draw the salary in the aided

post as the proposal has not been approved by the Competent

Authority. Accordingly, prayed to allow the Writ Petition.

5. Learned Government Pleader for respondents filed a

counter affidavit by contending that as on the date of

appointment of the petitioner, the rules for Establishment

Administration and control of private schools rules 1985 issued

in G.O.Ms.No.60, Education, dated 28.01.1986 and published

in A.P Gazettee on 5th February 1986 and were in force.

According to Sub rule (t) of rule of 6 of said rules, "The School

agency shall appoint teaching and non-teaching staff as per the

rules prescribed by the Director of School Education from time

to time. No teacher or ministerial staff whose appointment is

not approved by the District Educational Officer, shall be

continued to work in the school".

6. Learned Government Pleader for respondents admits that

G.O.Ms.No.524, Education, dated 20.12.1988 was not in

existence at that time, but G.O.Ms.No.60 was in existence.

Hence, the contention of the petitioner that there were no rules

at all governing the un-aided posts at the time of appointment

as SGT and no approval was needed for the appointment of

petitioner is not correct. Further, no separate provision existed

for minority institutions in the said rules. Hence the rules are

equally applicable whether it is minority or non- minority

schools.

7. Learned Government Pleader for respondents further

submits that the management has accorded promotion to

Mohd. Aliuddin Sanjari, SGT, as a School Assistant ( S.A.) in

grant-in-aid (G.I.A) post and got approved by the competent

authority. In the vacant G.I.A post of S.G.T. the management

has absorbed petitioner and submitted proposals for approval

of such absorption. The proposals were submitted by the

District Educational Officer, Warangal, vide his letter dated

24.07.2000 to the Regional Joint Director of School Education,

Warangal, who is the competent authority. In turn, the

Regional Joint Director of School Education, Warangal, vide

letter dated 03.01.2002 submitted proposals to the

Commissioner & Director of School Education, A.P.,

Hyderabad, to ratify the action taken by the management. On

the recommendation of the Regional Joint Director of School

Education, Warangal, the Commissioner & Director of School

Education, A.P., Hyderabad, submitted proposals in

Lr.No.Re.No.3354/D3-3/02, dated 15.01.2003 to the Secretary

to Government Education (PS-1) Department, A.P, Hyderabad,

requesting the Government to issue necessary orders to ratify

the action of the management i.e., absorption of the petitioner

into aided Secondary Grade Teacher post w.e.f. 17.09.1998.

8. Learned Government Pleader for respondents further

submits that as per rule 12 (8) of G.O Ms.No.1, Education

(PS.2) Department, dated 01.01.1994 read with rule (6) of

G.O.Ms.No.23 Minorities Welfare Department dated 10.03.1999

which were in force, the approval of competent authority is

necessary for the appointment of staff in aided post in

Educational Institutions including Minority Educational

institutions. In the circumstances, the Government after

careful consideration of the proposal of the Commissioner &

Director of School Education, A.P., Hyderabad, requesting the

Government to ratify the action of the management of Aided

Mahaboobia Panjantan (Boys) High School, Warangal, i.e.,

absorption of the petitioner into aided Secondary Grade

Teacher post w.e.f. 17.09.1998, rejected the same vide Govt.

Memo No.1175/PS-1/A2/2003, dated 13.02.2006. The said

Memo is, therefore, valid and in consonance with the rules in

force as such no illegality is committed in rejecting the claim.

Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

FINDINGS OF THE COURT:

9. The contention of the petitioner is that he was originally

appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in an un-aided post

on 16.06.1986 in the 5th respondent, and as on that date,

G.O.Ms.No.524 Education, dated 20.12.1988 was not in

existence. There were no rules at all governing the un-aided

posts at the time when the petitioner was appointed as a

Selection Grade Teacher in the 5th respondent school. The

Minority Institution need not seek approval for all

appointments made in the un-aided posts. The petitioner is

fully eligible and qualified to hold the post of Secondary Grade

Teacher.

10. It is further contended by the petitioner that one Sri

Mohd. Alluddin Sanjari, who was working as a Secondary

Grade Teacher in grant-in-aid post in the 5th respondent High

School, was promoted as a School Assistant, which is a grant-

in-aid post w.e.f. 01.09.1988. As the post of Second Grade

Teacher (grant-in-aid) fell vacant, to avoid dislocation of work,

the management of the 5th respondent High School by its

proceedings in Rc.No.WP1/98-99, dated 16.09.1998 posted the

petitioner to grant-in-aid post of Secondary Grade Teacher as

per the resolution of the Managing Committee of the 5th

respondent High School. Accordingly, the petitioner joined in

the post of secondary grade teacher (grant-in-aid) on

17.9.1998. He further contended that, for the post of

Secondary Grade Teacher, a resolution alone is sufficient, and

since the 5th respondent High School is a minority institution,

it is not required to obtain approval from any authority. This

contention of the petitioner is not correct for the following

reasons:

11. A perusal of the letter dated 17.09.1998 from the office of

the 5th respondent addressed to the 4th respondent, specifically

stated that the Managing Committee had absorbed Mr. Mohd.

Mustafa Ali, Inter TTC (who was already working in the un-

aided post as an Assistant Teacher under the same

management) as an Assistant Teacher in the Grant-in-aid post

w.e.f. 17.09.1998 in place of Mr. Mohd. Aliuddin Sanjeri,

Assistant Teacher, who has already been promoted as School

Assistant, to avoid the dislocation of the educational work, on

temporary basis, subject to the approval of the District

Educational Officer, Warangal, and the Regional Joint Director

of School Education, Warangal. The said letter reflects that it

is not a final order, and the appointment of the petitioner will

be subject to approval of the District Educational Officer,

Warangal, and the Regional Joint Director of School Education,

Warangal.

12. Apart from the above, a perusal of the letter dated

15.01.2003 from the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent

regarding absorption of MD. Mustafa Ali (petitioner) from un-

aided post of SGT to Grant-in-aid of SGT in 5th respondent

school specifically observed as follows:

"5th respondent created an un-aided post of SGBT without permission of the department and appointed Sri Md. Mustafa Ali in the un-aided post of SGT on 16.6.1986 prior to the enforcement of G.O.Ms.No.524, Education, dated 20.12.1988 and at the time there was no rule existing well before the candidate was appointed for obtaining approval orders of the Department, and hence, the management has not obtained the approval orders of the Department."

The above letter itself is reflecting contrary statements

between the 5th respondent Institution and other respondents.

If the above contention is right, the letter 17.09.1998 should

not mention subject to the approval of the District Educational

Officer, Warangal, and the Regional Joint Director of School

Education, Warangal.

13. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents

is that all appointments made either teaching or non-teaching

staff by aided or un-aided instructions, shall be subject to the

approval of the competent authority, and to fortify his

contention, he also relied upon the Memo

No.1175/PS.I/A2/2003, dated 13.02.2006, wherein it is

mentioned that as per Rule 12(8) G.O.Ms.No.1, Edn.(PS.2)

Department, dated 01.01.1994, read with the rule 6 of

G.O.Ms.No.23 Minorities (M&R) Department, dated

10.03.1999, the approval of competent authority is necessary

for the appointments of staff in aided posts in educational

institutions including minority educations institutions.

14. An extract of Rule 12 and 13 of G.O.Ms.No.1, Edn.(PS.2)

Department, dated 01.01.1994, Rule 12(8) reads as follows:

"All appointments made either teaching or non-teaching staff by aided or un-aided institutions shall be subject to the approval of the competent authority. For this purpose, the education agency shall inform the competent authority within one month of the selection. The competent authority shall grant approval unless the selection has been in violation of these rules. In order to obviate confusion, it shall be incumbent on the educational agency to remind the

competent authority one month after the initial communication, if no approval is received. The burden of proof of having communicated the selection to the competent authority shall lie with the educational agency."

15. The contention of the respondent is that on the date of

appointment of the petitioner, the rules for establishment,

administration and control of private schools rules, 1985

issued in G.O.Ms.No.60, Education, dated 28.01.1986 and

published in AP Gazette on 05.02.1986 and were in force.

According to sub rule (t) of Rule of 6 of said rules, "The school

agency shall appoint teaching and non-teaching staff as per the

rules prescribed by the Director of School Education from time

to time. No teacher or ministerial staff whose appointment is

not approved by the District Educational Officer shall be

continued to work in the school. It is a fact that

G.O.Ms.No.524 Education, dated 20.12.1988 was not in