Implementation of Junior Lecturer unaided for absorption into Grant-in-Aid post


Smt.G.Parvathi Devi, unaided Junior Lecturer in Telugu, is working in Antarvedipalem Firka Development Trust Junior College, Malikipuram, East Godavari District against the aided vacancy from 01-11-1990. As per Court orders dated 28-1-2006 in W.P.No.1515 of 2006 which was filed by her for regularization, the Government in its Memo No.1679/IE.II-1/2006-5, dated 16-5-2006 rejected the claim of the individual on the grounds that the individual has not fulfilled the conditions laid down in G.O.Ms.No.328 Education(CE.III) Department, dated 15-7-1997 as she is appointed on 01-11-1990, insufficient work load and also in terms of ban orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.35, Higher Education (CE.II-1) Department, dated 27-3-2006.

2. Aggrieved by the above orders, Smt.G.Parvathi Devi, unaided Junior Lecturer in Telugu, Antarvedipalem Firka Development Trust Junior College, Malikipuram, East Godavari District has filed W.P.No.14482 of 2006 in the Hon’ble High Court and the Hon’ble Court has passed orders in the reference 1st read above, as follows.
“……the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order dated 16-5-2006 and the respondents are directed to absorb the petitioner against any one of the aided vacancies of Junior Lecturers in Telugu in the 5th Respondent College (Antarvedipalem Firka Development Trust Junior College, Malikipuram, East Godavari District) with effect from the date of the recommendation made i.e. 3-12-2001, on which date the imposition of ban was not available and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

While the matter is under examination, Smt.G.Parvathi Devi, unaided Junior Lecturer in Telugu, A.F.D.T. Junior College, Malikipuram, East Godavari District has filed Contempt Case No.557 of 2012 for non-implementation of Hon’ble High Court orders dated 14-2-2011 in W.P.No.14482 of 2006.

As per orders of the Government, the Commissioner of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad has filed W.A.No.1047 of 2012 before the Hon’ble Division Bench. In the reference 3rd read above, the Hon’ble High Court in its orders dated 5-9-2012, dismissed the appeal observing that the Writ petitioner/1st respondent herein was appointed by following due process of law and her appointment was approved by the Board of Intermediate Education by proceedings dated 17-12-1998. Therefore, as and when a vacancy arises to the aided post, she is entitled to be absorbed in such vacancy. The Court held that the order of the single judge does not suffer from any irregularity or illegality warranting interference.

The Commissioner of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad has requested the Government for permission to file SLP. in Supreme Court immediately and with reference to the instructions issued by the Government in the reference 5th read above, the CIE. has filed S.L.P.No.38336 of 2012 against the orders of Hon’ble High Court dated 5-9-2012 in W.A.No.1047 of 2012.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its orders dated 7-1-2013 in S.L.P.No.38336 of 2012, while dismissing the S.L.P., has granted eight weeks time for implementation of the orders dated 14-2-2011 in W.P.14482 of 2006 of Hon’ble High Court.

The Hon’ble High Court in its orders dated 1-2-2013 in C.C.No.557 of 2012 has ordered for appearance of the respondents in the event the order is not complied with by 8-3-2013, as the (8) weeks time granted by Hon’ble Supreme Court would expire on 4-3-2013.

8. In the reference 8th read above, the Commissioner of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad has stated that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its orders dated 7-1-2012 dismissed the S.L.P.No.38336 of 2012 and granted (8) weeks time for implementation of the orders. A Review Petition was also filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide SR.No.4250/2013 against its orders dated 7-1-2013 in S.L.P.No.38336 of 2012. Further orders on the review petition is awaited. The Contempt Case of Smt.Parvathi Devi is listed for hearing on 8-3-2013 and the Hon’ble High Court has ordered for personal appearance of officers. The Commissioner of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad is therefore requested the Government to consider issuing orders to Smt.Parvathi Devi into aided post on a purely temporary basis until the review petition is finally decided by the Supreme Court.

Government after careful examination and in order to comply with the orders of the Hon’ble High Court and since there is no other alternative except to implement the Hon’ble Court orders, hereby permit the Commissioner of Intermediate Education to absorb Smt.G.Parvathi Devi, unaided J.L. in Telugu, A.F.D.T. Junior College, Malikipuram, East Godavari District into Grant-in-Aid post with effect from 3-12-2001, as a special case.

The orders issued in para (9) above are subject to outcome of Review Petition filed against the orders dated 7-1-2013 in S.L.P.No.38336 of 2012 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. These orders are applicable to the Writ Petitioner only.

The Commissioner of Intermediate Education, Hyderabad shall take further action accordingly.

This order issues with the concurrence of the Finance (Expr.HE) Department, vide their U.O.No.5638-A/43/A1/PC.III/2013, dated 05-03-2013.
1) Hon’ble High Court of A.P., orders dated 14-02-2011 in W.P.No.14482 of 2006.
2) Contempt Case No.557 of 2012 filed by Smt.G.Parvathi Devi, J.L.(Unaided), AFDT. Junior College, Malikipuram, East Godavari District.
3) Hon’ble High Court of A.P., orders dated 05-09-2012 in W.A.No.1047 of 2012.
4) From Commissioner of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad Lr.Rc.No.Admn.I-B-1/12132/2006, dated 10-10-2012.
5) Govt.Memo No.4294/IE.II-1/2011, dated 09-11-2012.
6) Hon’ble Supreme Court of India orders dated 7-1-2013 in SLP.No.38336 of 2012.
7) Hon’ble High Court orders dated 01-02-2013 in C.C.No.557 of 2012.
8) From Commissioner of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad Lr.Rc.No.Admn.I-B-1/12132/2006, dated 26-2-2013.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU

 

WRIT PETITION No.14482 of 2006

 

ORDER :

 

This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus to declare the Government Memo No.1679/IE.II.1/2006-5, dated 16.5.2006, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to declare that the petitioner is fully eligible and qualified to be admitted against the grant-in-aid post of Junior Lecturer in Telugu in the 5th respondent College, with all consequential benefits.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Lecturer in Telugu in the 5th respondent College in the year 1990 and her status as unaided Lecturer in the 5th respondent college was approved by the respondents by proceedings dated 17.12.1998. While so, since a post of Junior Lecturer in Telugu fell vacant, which was admitted to grant-in-aid on 8.2.2001, after being subjected to the selection process, the name of the petitioner was recommended by the management of 5th respondent college for being absorbed against the existing aided vacancy of Junior Lecturer in Telugu. However, the case of the petitioner was rejected by the 2nd respondent through proceedings dated 15.11.2001 on the ground that the appointment by transfer of the petitioner from unaided post of Junior Lecturer to the existing aided vacant post of Junior Lecturer in Telugu is not feasible for compliance. However, the case of the petitioner was again recommended on 3.12.2001 by the management of 5th respondent college and the same was again rejected by the Government in Memo No.1679/IE.II.1/2006-5, dated 16.5.2006, stating that with a view to limit the financial commitment of the Government in the aided sector of Higher Education, Government have issued orders vide G.O.Ms.No.35, Higher Education, dated 27.3.2006, banning any further filling up of vacancies in aided colleges by way of direct recruitment.

3. The said reason assigned by the respondents appears to be most unreasonable. There is no necessity of creating any new vacancy for the purpose of absorption of the petitioner in aided vacancy. Already three vacancies of aided Junior Lecturers in Telugu were available in the 5th respondent college. Inspite of that, the case of the petitioner was rejected only on the ground that there is a ban. This Court time and again held that the ban on recruitment is applicable only when there is a direct recruitment and not for absorption of the persons already working in the unaided section.

4. Further, it is interesting to notice that at para-4 of the said order dated 16.5.2006, it is stated as under:

“The Commissioner of Intermediate Education in his letter dated 09.05.2006, has further reported that there are         5 aided sections in AFDT Junior College (Aided), Malikpuram in East Godavari District and 3 aided posts of Junior Lecturers in Telugu were originally sanctioned in the said college. As against the said 3 posts, Sri K. Ramachandra Murthy is working against the 1st aided post and Sri G.S. Vishwanatha Raju is working against the 2ndpost. Smt. G.Parvathi Devi, unaided JL in Telugu is working against the 3rd vacancy with effect from 01.11.1990. Though the aided post of Junior Lecturer in Telugu is vacant from 01.06.1984, as on date, the workload in Telugu subject is sufficient only for 2 Junior Lecturers and there is no work for the 3rd Junior Lecturer post in Telugu in the said college. Also each Aided Junior College under Private Management is a separate unit for the purpose of appointment.”

5. It could be seen that 2 other Lecturers, who are working against aided vacancies of Telugu Junior Lecturers have already attained the age of superannuation and retired from service. At least, the petitioner could have been absorbed against those vacancies. Thus, as on date, though three aided vacancies of Junior Lecturers are available, the case of the petitioner was rejected only on the ground that there is a ban by virtue of the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.35, Higher Education, dated 27.3.2006.

6. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that the rationale applied by the respondents is arbitrary and illegal and in the teeth of availability of three aided vacancies, the petitioner is entitled for being absorbed against any one of the said aided vacancies in the 5th respondent college. The petitioner has been working for the last more than 21 years as Lecturer in Telugu and she is asked to continue as Lecturer in unaided vacancy. This is nothing but harassment. It appears that the cases of many of the Lecturers are being rejected for absorption against the available aided vacancies. This will certainly cause hindrance in the educational excellence and imparting instructions to the students. Hence, the impugned order dated 16.5.2006 is liable to be set aside.

7. In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order dated 16.5.2006 and the respondents are directed to absorb the petitioner against any one of the aided vacancies of Junior Lecturers in Telugu in the 5th respondent college with effect from the date of the recommendation made i.e., 3.12.2001, on which date the imposition of ban was not available, and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.