AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Chandru, J.—The Petitioner has come forward to challenge an order passed by the State Government in G.O. Ms. No. 176 School
Education Department dated 20-08-2008. By the aforesaid order, the State Government introduced yoga for classes v. Ito XI. By introducing
yoga classes without interrupting the regular academic work, the State Government directed the School management that out of two teaching hours
allotted to physical education, one teaching hour can be used for Thianam, Yogasanam and Pranayamam and there is no change for another one
hour teaching in physical education. It is also made clear that while preparing time table, the School management must adhere to allot one hour
teaching time for yoga classes for the students and there may not be any disturbance to the regular academic work. The State Government also
stated that yoga shall be taught to the students by the Physical Education Teachers. For that purpose, they have been given training in the Block
Resource Centre.
The grievance of the Petitioner was that instead of appointing Yoga teachers, who are having qualification, asking the Physical Education
Teachers to teach Yoga was erroneous and this denies employment to the persons who are having regular Diploma. It is also stated that Physical
Education Teachers are not qualified to teach Yoga and no one can learn the principles of Yoga within a short training given by the Block
Resource Centre. It is also claimed that the Petitioner had obtained the Diploma in Yogic Science and Education from the Monomania
SundaranarUniversity at Tirunelveli and he is competent to teach Yoga. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition came to be filed.
The Writ Petition was admitted on 9.12.2010. Pending the Writ Petition, in the application for stay, only Notice was ordered. Subsequently, the
said application was dismissed by this Court.
The Petitioner is a rank outsider to the impugned G.O. It is for the Government to decide not only the core curriculum of academic work but
even the extra curricular co-related courses that is to be taught to the students. In the present case, the preamble to the Government Order itself
shows that by imparting training in Yoga, the students can have good habits and good sense. The said courses have been introduced without
disturbing the other curriculum work run by the School. As to how the said training should be given is largely left to the State Government and the
Petitioner under the guise of challenging the G.O cannot claim the avenue for appointment. The Petitioner in the absence of legal or enforceable
right cannot challenge the said Government Order. The Writ Petition is misconceived. Accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.