SARASWATI EDUCATION TRUST Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of filing this letters patent appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellant -original petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 26th September 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 11809 of 2007 vide which he dismissed the said writ petition and confirmed order dated 12.10.2006 made by respondent No. 2 -District Education Officer, Ahmedabad City. The short facts of the present case are that the appellant No. 1 -Trust runs a secondary school in Gujarati medium and another Hindi medium school. Respondent No. 3 who was working as a Teacher and who was qualified to teach Hindi subject was declared as surplus teacher vide order dated NIL.08.2004 pursuant to hearing which took place on 27.07.2004 because there was reduction of one class each in Standards VIII and IX. However, vide the same order it was stated that as the school management had already terminated services of one lady teacher and it was possible for the School Management to absorb respondent No. 3 vice the said lady teacher whose services were terminated.

(2.) THEREFORE , the school management approached respondent No. 2 praying that respondent No. 3 was a surplus teacher because there was need for a teacher in English considering the fact that there was 155 students in three classes of Standards VIII, IX and X. At the hearing on the application made by the school management the principal of the school stated that respondent No. 3 had not cleared Standards X and XII examinations with English language as one of the subjects and hence, being the junior most, was required to be declared surplus. That after creating such vacancy a teacher for English language should be permitted to be appointed. However, as the request of the appellants was rejected by the District Education Officer, Ahmedabad vide order dated 12th October 2006 the appellants challenged the same before the learned Single Judge by filing the writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 11809 of 2007. The appellants further prayed for a direction to provide a qualified English teacher from the list of surplus teachers available with respondent No. 2, and at the same time a consequential direction to absorb respondent No. 3 in another school or declare respondent No. 3 as a surplus teacher. The said writ petition came to be rejected by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 26th September 2007.

(3.) AS against that, Mr. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader as well as Mr. Hemang Rawal, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 have supported the order of the learned Single Judge and prayed that the appeal may be dismissed.