RAJIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in Physics by the Parents Teacher Association on 3.7.2002 and was being paid the Honorarium by the Parents Teacher Association, but subsequently was being paid from the Government Exchequer. The State Government issued a Government Order dated 03.02.2009 whereby a decision was taken that a P.T.A. Teacher should be given an appointment as an ad hoc teacher subject to terms and conditions mentioned therein. Based on the said Government Order, the District Education Officer issued a Circular dated 09.03.2009, directing all the managements of aided institutions to furnish the requisite information regarding P.T.A. Teachers, so that their claim for grant of ad hoc appointment could be considered by the State Government. Since the management was not complying with the Circular dated 09.03.2009 and was not forwarding the name of the petitioner to the State Government, the present writ petition was filed praying that the Committee of Management of Janta Inter College, Rudrapur should be directed to comply with the direction of the District Education Officer dated 09.03.2009.

(2.) The State Government in its counter affidavit has contended that since the management has not sent any response pursuant to the Government Order and the letter of the District Education Officer, no decision could be taken in respect of the petitioner. The respondents have, however, submitted that the petitioner is not a trained graduate, i.e., B.Ed., as provided u/s 24 of the Education Act, 2006, and consequently, cannot be considered for an ad hoc appointment.

(3.) The Committee of Management has also filed a counter affidavit and contended that pursuant to the Circular of the District Education Officer dated 09.03.2009 it was found that the petitioner was appointed without holding any process of selection nor any advertisement was issued in the newspaper. Consequently, since the appointment of the petitioner as a P.T.A. Teacher was not in accordance with the process of selection, his name could not be forwarded to the State Government.