JOGINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the communication dated 27th August, 2007 (Annexure P-3), issued by the respondents, whereby grants under Grant-in-Aid to Parent-Teacher Associations Rules, 2006 came to be discontinued in respect of schools located in Municipal Corporations, Municipal Committees and Nagar Panchayats of the State, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein for following relief:

(2.) For having a bird's eye view of the matter, certain undisputed facts as emerge from the pleadings of the parties, are that the petitioner after having passed his M.Com., applied for the post of Lecturer Commerce, pursuant to an advertisement issued by respondent No.3. It is also not in dispute that interview for the post of Lecturer in Commerce subject at Government Senior Secondary School, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh was conducted strictly as per guidelines laid down in the Education Code by a duly constituted Committee of Parent-Teacher Association. On the basis of his performance in the interview, petitioner was offered appointment as Lecturer (Commerce) vide office order dated 6.10.2007 (Annexure P-2) by respondent No.3. As per terms and conditions contained in the aforesaid letter, respondent No.3 agreed to pay to the petitioner Rs.3,000/- per month and petitioner joined as PTA Lecturer in the subject of Commerce at Government Senior Secondary School, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, with effect from 9.10.2007.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, especially the reply filed by the respondents-State, this Court finds that there is no dispute inter se parties as far as appointment of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in the subject of Commerce by respondent No.3 is concerned. Similarly, there is no dispute that prior to issuance of communication dated 27.8.2007 (annexure P-3), Schools located in Municipal Corporation, Municipal Committees and Nagar Panchayats were being released grant under Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006. Vide aforesaid communication, though Higher Education Department decided to discontinue the grants earlier being given to the Schools located in Municipal Corporation, Municipal Committees and Nagar Panchayats of the State but no specific reason/explanation has been assigned in the communication in question for continuing said grants in respect of Government Colleges located in the same areas. Though, careful perusal of aforesaid communication discloses no reason for discontinuing grants under Grant-in-Aid Rules but respondents, in their reply to the petition, have stated that the decision not to release grants has been taken in view of the fact that the Schools situate in urban areas are mostly manned by regular teachers, whereas, grant to PTA provided teachers is applicable only to those teachers, who are working out of municipal areas of the State, where most of posts are lying vacant. Besides above, respondents, in their reply, have stated that the petitioner was engaged on 6.10.2007 by the PTA (respondent No.3), as such, Grant-in-Aid cannot be given to the petitioner and it is only for the PTA concerned, to pay the due and admissible salary out of its own funds. Apart from above, no cogent and convincing reason has been assigned by the concerned Department, while carving out a distinction between the schools located in urban areas like Municipal Corporation, Municipal Committees and Nagar Panchayats and schools located in rural areas. Very purpose of authorizing PTA to appoint teachers in the schools is/was to ensure that no post of teacher remains vacant and in this process, Government further with a view to ensure filling up of vacancies of teachers in the schools situate in rural areas, made provision for grants under Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006. Respondents, in their reply have categorically admitted that as per Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006, grant is released to the PTA, who made teacher available to the educational institutions for the purpose of imparting education to its students, as such, respondents, in the case at hand, are not justified in stating that since the petitioner came to be appointed by PTA, his due and admissible salary would be paid by the PTA concerned. Besides above, respondents have stated in their reply that Government has released Grant-in-Aid to those institutions, where teachers are engaged after following proper procedure by the concerned PTA. In the case at hand, no material worth credence has been placed on record by the respondents indicative of the fact that petitioner was not appointed after following due procedure or that he does not possess the essential qualifications for holding the post in question.