AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Appellant affirmed by Sri Jitendra Kumar, Principal Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of U.P. Lucknow, which is taken on record.
The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 5.01.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge, wherein the Contempt Application No. 2496 of 2010 preferred by the Respondents herein a direction was issued to the opposite party either to comply with the order dated 12.03.2010 or to appear in person before the Court on the date fixed.
It appears that the present Respondents had approached this Court by means of writ petition No. 10449 of 2010 with grievance that even though there are 7 sanctioned posts in the primary section in the institution, 5 posts are lying vacant and permission to fill up the said posts is not being accorded. The sanction was held back by the State Authority, as number of students have gone down drastically, the excess posts in the norms fixed stood lapsed and, therefore, there is no question of granting sanction to fill up the post. This Court vide judgment and order dated 12.03.2010 has disposed of the writ petition No. 10449 of 2010 by following its earlier decision in writ petition No. 50862 of 2009, Committee of Management v. State of U.P. and Ors., decided on 21.10.2009, reported in 2009 (10) ADJ 200 and writ petition No. 33436 of 2009, Prem Narain Shukla and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors., decided on 23.7.2009, reported in 2009 (5) ESC 3112(All.) The direction contained in the judgment and order dated 12.03.2010 was not complied with. The present Respondent herein approached this Court by filing Contempt Petition No. 2496 of 2010 in which notices were issued at the first instance and thereafter the impugned order has been passed directing personal appearance in case the order passed of the writ court is not complied with.
We have heard Sri Pankaj Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the Appellants and Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri P.N. Ojha on behalf of Respondents. Sri Rai submitted that direction given by the writ court vide order dated 12.03.2010 could not be complied with as number of students in primary section of the institution has gone down drastically. He further submitted that at least 2 posts are required. The order to grant permission to fill 5 posts would not be applicable to the present case. He also brought to the notice of the Court the order dated 21.07.2010 passed by the Secretary Secondary Education, a copy of which is placed at page 156 of the paper book of memo of appeal which is the factual position of the students in the classes from a perusal of which it appears that there are only 2 students in class 1. there is no student in class 2 and there are 9 students in class 3. However in class 4, there are 18 students in class 4A and 3 students in class 4B respectively whereas in class 5, there are 13 students in class 5A and 2 students in class 5 B respectively. He thus submitted that in view of the norms of one teacher for 40 students, 2 teachers are necessary for the primary section and not 7 teachers, as demanded.
Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel submitted that all sections and classes have been running since long. As some teachers have retired, the number of students subsequently have also got reduced as no parent would like to send their children to school where there is no teacher. On this situation, the Court sought instruction from the Additional Chief Standing Counsel as to whether the State Government is willing to sanction at least one teacher for each class and give permission to fill up one post of teacher for each class and 2 sections of class 4 and 5 to be merged. If, however, the number of students in class 4 and 5 increase to more than 40 necessitating/justifying the opening of a new section then permission to fill the additional post of teachers out of the already sanctioned strength would be given or not, Sri Pankaj Rai, Additional Chief Standing Counsel has filed an affidavit of Sri Jitendra Kumar, Principal Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of U.P., Lucknow, wherein it has been averred in paragraph 5 of the affidavit that one post of teacher is permissible in every class.
In the present case in view of low strength of the students and in view of the statement, we dispose of the appeal as well as the contempt petition with the direction to the State Government to grant permission to fill up the vacant posts of teachers of the primary section of the institution by taking one teacher for every one class, and in case more than 40 students in a class and another section is necessary, the State Government shall grant permission to fill up the additional post for fresh section.
It may be mentioned here that in the supplementary affidavit, it has been stated that one teacher working in the primary section has already been promoted as assistant teacher of L.T. Grade, as a result, there is only one teacher available in the primary section. Therefore, the State Government is directed to grant permission to fill up 4 posts at the present moment. An undertaking is given by the institution to issue a fresh advertisement also. This order shall be complied with by the institution and the State Government, as they are under Constitutional responsibility under Article 21A of the Constitution of India to see that the citizens are imparted education in the institution.
In view of the forgoing discussion both the appeal and the contempt petition stands disposed off.