A Single Judge Bench of Allahabad High Court comprising of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra while hearing a plea observed that- performing additional duties is not the reason for which a teacher is appointed. The court has directed that it is only after performing essential functions as a teacher that State can ask a teacher to perform additional work.
The Court while dealing with a petition filed by one Viveka Nand Dubey, a headmaster in a primary school, has held that,
“Performance of additional work in no circumstance can be at the cost of teaching work by the concerned teacher/Headmaster. This Court, therefore, is not inclined to entertain petitioner's grievance, inasmuch as the respondents have merely asked the teachers to perform their essential teaching work and not encourage allocation of additional duties as District Coordinator etc.”
Background of the Case
The District Basic Education Officer, Chandauli sent the petitioner on deputation on the post of Zima Vyayam Shikshak in 2017, and Petitioner joined as such and is working since then.
In January 2021, an order was passed by the Director General School Education stating that for various works relating to supervision of games and scouts activity, teachers were sent on deputation but they were not performing teaching work and were only performing other works.
Therefore, the Director-General School Education issued direction to all District Basic Education Officers requiring the games and scouts teachers/ physical education teachers attached at the block level to be relieved so that these teachers could perform their primary function as a teacher in the school and only in addition to it they may perform other functions.
A consequential order was passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Chandauli relieving the petitioner from the additional work assigned to him on account of his deputation. The petitioner being aggrieved by the above-mentioned orders- filed the petition before this Court.
Submission of Petitioner:
The Counsel on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was only games teacher and his activity of teaching in school was not that important as of teachers who were to teach Science and Humanity subjects. It was further submitted that such teachers were given additional work and were also getting an allowance of Rs.2500/- per month, whereas the petitioner's allowance was only Rs.300/- per month. It also the case of the petitioner that there was no justification to repatriate the petitioner and the State did not treat him at par with other teachers, who were to act as academic key resource person.
Reasoning and Decision of the Court
The Court directed the Director-General to ensure that all teachers substantively appointed as such were allowed to function and perform teaching work first and only thereafter additional work might be given to them in case of need. The Director-General, School Education, was given liberty to pass a necessary decision in that regard.
Case details
Petitioner:- Vikeka Nand Dubey
Respondent:- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner:- Devi Prasad Mishra
Counsel for Respondent:- C.S.C., Anuj Agrawal, Deo Dayal, Durga Singh
Bench: Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
