Appointments under School Management Committee Policy are in violation of Supreme Court order – held HP High Court

Spread the love

Kuldeep Kumar Vs State of HP

CWP No. 1728 of 2019 08.08.2019

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge and Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) – Article 14 and 16 – equal opportunities of appointments – appointments under School Management Committee Policy – in violation of order dated 13.2.2017 of the Hon’ble apex Court passed in SLP No.1426 of 2015 and its connected matters SLP Nos. 6090, 6644 and 7709 of 2015, because the apex Court has permitted the appointment of teachers by the respondent-State only by following the competitive method/ procedure by giving equal opportunity to all the eligible candidates

Order:

  1. Learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record the written instructions, which reveals that recently respondent No.3 vide letter No. EDN-H(19)B(1)6/2010-11-requisition dated 17.7.2019, has sought the approval of respondent No.2 to fill-up 723 posts of PGT in various subjects lying vacant in different schools in the State. This communication further reveals that the engagement of teachers under SMC Policy is a stop gap arrangement.
  2. Resorting to the engagement of the teachers in the School under SMC Policy is in violation of order dated 13.2.2017 of the Hon’ble apex Court passed in SLP No.1426 of 2015 and its connected matters SLP Nos. 6090, 6644 and 7709 of 2015, because the apex Court has permitted the appointment of teachers by the respondent-State only by following the competitive method/ procedure by giving equal opportunity to all the eligible candidates.
  3. The practice of appointment of teachers under SMC Policy is also in derogation of the own decision of the respondent-State that no appointment/engagement of teachers on SMC/ period basis will be made in the State, taken consequent upon the orders ibid. The matter qua recruitment of teachers in the Schools in the State is also being monitored by this Court in CWPIL No.157 of 2017. Order dated 10.10.2018, annexed to the written instructions reveals that the respondent-State was directed to apprise this Court the time limit within which the regular recruitment process shall be initiated/completed to fill-up the vacant posts in the Education Department. The result, however, is not encouraging as irrespective of considerable period elapsed, the respondent-State has failed to do the needful and to the contrary still resorting to appointment/engagement of teachers in the Schools under SMC Policy, which is not at all appreciable being violative of the right to education of the citizen, a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.
  4. It is in this backdrop, we direct the respondent-State to file reply to this writ petition within three weeks. In the reply to be so filed, the respondent-State shall indicate the number of the teachers in different category appointed/engaged under SMC Policy and continuing as such. The vacancies in each category of teachers in the State and the steps taken to fill-up the same strictly in accordance with the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, be also indicated/specified in the reply to be so filed. 5. In the interim, we refrain ourselves from passing any order, at this stage, on the assurance given by learned Deputy Advocate General that till further orders passed in this matter, no appointment/engagement of the teachers under the SMC Policy will be made. List on 5th September, 2019.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Next Post

List of Witness

Sun Aug 11 , 2019
Spread the love                    Provision for calling of witnesses exist under […]
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)