GUEST TEACHERS SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT 30TH MARCH,2012

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petitions(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012
CC 5956-5957/12

(Under Article 136 of the Constitution against the final
judgment and order dated 30/03/2011 passed by the High Court of
Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No.6090 of 2010 and
against the final judgment and order dated 15/03/2012 passed by
the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil
Misc.No.17483 of 2011)

NARESH KUMAR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.ETC. Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for permission to file SLP and with prayer for
interim relief )

WITH SLP(C) NO. 10818 of 2012
(With appln.(s)for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned
judgment and permission to place addl.documents on record and
with prayer for interim relief and office report)

Date: 30/03/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR

For Petitioner(s) Mr. G.E.Vahanvati, A.G.I.
in SLP(C)10818/12 Mr. H.S. Hooda, A.G.Haryana.
Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Abhijat P.Medh, AOR.

Sri Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv.
in SLP(C)..../12 Ms. Indu Malhotra, Sr. Adv.
CC 5956-5957/12 Ms. Mahalakshmi Pavani, Adv.
Sri G.Balaji, Adv.
SLP(C)...CC 5956-5957/12,etc.

2

Ms. Chinmaya Chandra, Adv.
Sri Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
for M/S.Mahalakshmi Balaji & Co.,Advs.

For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. John Mathew,AOR.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R

1. Permission to file SLPs granted.

2. Three Special Leave Petitions have been

filed,two by Mr. Naresh Kumar & Ors., in

SLP(C)......CC Nos.5956-5957 of 2012,against

the final judgment and order dated 30th March,

2011, passed in CWP No.6090 of 2010 and the

final judgment and order dated 15th March, 2012,

in Civil Misc.No.17483 of 2011, passed by the

Punjab & Haryana High Court, and SLP(C)No.10818

of 2012, filed by the State of Haryana against

the final judgment and order dated 15th March,

2012, passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court

in C.M.No.17483/11 in Civil Writ Petition

No.6090 of 2010.

3. The subject-matter of all the three

Special Leave Petitions is with regard to the

appointment of 'Guest Teachers' and their

continuance, without recruitment of teachers in

3

the various educational institutions, by the

regular process of recruitment. The issue

involved appears to have been considered by the

Punjab & Haryana High Court, in several matters,

since quite some time.In fact, we have been

able to glean from the facts as disclosed that

this issue came up for consideration before the

Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High

Court in CWP No.6090 of 2010, which has been

questioned in SLP(C)......CC 5956-5957 of 2012.

The said writ petition was disposed of by the

judgment and order of the Punjab & Haryana High

Court dated 30th March, 2011, wherein it was

mentioned that the specific challenge which had

been made in the writ petition was with regard

to the decision of the respondents to extend

the services of 'Guest Teachers' appointed under

contract basis in various Government schools of

the State of Haryana. In the said Writ

Petition, it was also indicated that the

extension was proposed for a further period of

one year with effect from 1st April,2011.

Incidentally, the respondent No.6 in the said

writ petition is duly represented before us and

4

he is a candidate for consideration for

appointment in the regular course.The said

Writ Petition was disposed of in terms of a

schedule, which had been prepared by the

respondent-authorities, and the Division Bench

of the Punjab & Haryana High Court made it very

clear that while it would be open to the State

to extend the tenure of the'GuestTeachers' at

all levels, such extension should not be beyond

31st March,2012. It was also indicated that on

the expiry of the said date, i.e.31st March,

2012, services of all the 'Guest Teachers'

should be understood to have lapsed in terms

of the said judgment and it would not be open

for the State to continue such 'Guest Teachers'

in service. It is,in fact, the said

directions which had led to the filing of the

Special Leave Petitions. The Division Bench

had also indicated that there would be no

further appointment of 'Guest Teachers' during

the next Academic year, starting from 1st April,

2011, and the short-fall,if any, in the

availability of teachers would have to be made

up by the State by undertaking a fresh process/

5

exercise of posting and re-posting of teachers

according to the needs of each school.

Various other directions were also given

regarding appointment of teachers on regular

basis.

4. Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned senior

advocate, appearing for the petitioners in the

said Special Leave Petitions, has submitted that

the direction referred to hereinabove given by

the Division Bench of the High Court would

create a situation in which after 1st April,

2012, there would be no teachers available in

place of the 'Guest Teachers' and unless the

directions was extended till at least regular

appointments were made, the students in the

various institutions would suffer. Of course,

Mr. Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel, has

also voiced his apprehension that this may lead

to continuance of the process of continuing with

the 'Guest Teachers'.

5. The other Special Leave Petition has been

filed by the State of Haryana, in regard to the

order passed by the Division Bench of the High

Court on 15th March, 2012,in C.M.No.17483/11 in

6

Civil Writ Petition No.6090 of 2010. By the

said order, the Division Bench of the High Court

rejected the prayer of the State of Haryana for

extension of time to implement the directions

contained in the order dated 30th March, 2011.

The learned Attorney General for India,

appearing for the State of Haryana, however,

brought to our notice an order subsequently

passed by the same Division Bench on 20th March,

2012, whereby a scheme for filling up the vacant

posts in order to comply with the directions

contained in the order of 30th March, 2011, had

been placed before the Court and the same had

been accepted, in fact, a prayer had been made

for about ten months' time to give effect to the

said scheme. The learned Attorney General for

India pointed out that in the said order, the

Court had observed that in view of the scheme it

was no longer necessary for the Court to monitor

the actions of the State any further. On the

contrary, the Court deemed it appropriate to

close the writ petition, which was in the nature

of a public interest litigation, by directing

the State of Haryana to initiate and comply with

7

and take necessary action in terms of the

averments made in the affidavit dated 19th March,

2012, affirmed by the Financial Commissioner and

Member Secretary to the Government of Haryana,

School Education Department, and to adhere to

the time schedule mentioned in the said

affidavit.

6. The learned Attorney General for India,

submitted that there being two contrary

directions, one passed on 15th March, 2012, and

the other on 20th March, 2012, accepting the

scheme, and, in fact, extending the time for

giving effect to the scheme, the State of

Haryana had filed the Special Leave Petition to

clarify the differences in the two orders.

7. Having heard the learned Attorney General

for India, Mr. Subramanium and Mr. Vishwanathan,

learned senior advocates, for the parties and

also keeping in mind the submissions made by Mr.

Vishwanathan, that the intention of the Division

Bench of the High Court was that no further

appointments of 'Guest Teachers' should be made

after 1st April, 2012, and that the vacancies

should be filled up by posting and reposting

8

teachers in the different institutions, we feel

that the two things should really be kept

separate,notwithstanding the apprehension

voiced by Mr. Vishwanathan, that this could lead

to continuance of appointment of 'Guest

Teachers'.

8. We make it very clear that as directed by

the Division Bench of the High Court, no fresh

appointments of 'Guest Teachers' will be made

from 1st April, 2012. However, since students

also cannot be made to suffer on account of the

delay in the appointment of regular teachers, we

direct that the exercise indicated in the

scheme,must be completed within the time

specified in the scheme and no further extension

or deviation therefrom will be permitted.

9. Till then, the 'Guest Teachers' may be

allowed to continue to function, as they have

been doing so far.

10. We once again reiterate that the

recruitment of teachers on the regular basis

shall not be supplemented or replaced by this

procedure of appointing 'Guest Teachers' for

the sake of convenience.

9

11. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed

of with the aforesaid observations.

12. There will be no orders as to costs.

(Sheetal Dhingra) (Juginder Kaur)
COURT MASTER Assistant Registrar

Digg Google Bookmarks reddit Mixx StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Buzz DesignFloat Delicious BlinkList Furl

1 comments: on "GUEST TEACHERS SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT 30TH MARCH,2012"

Anonymous said...

thanks

YOUR OPINION COUNTS :Have any questions or comments? Participate in the discussions today. Use the form below to ask your questions and share your ideas.