Allowed

Krishna and Another v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2021WRIA/986/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the deployment of primary teachers for non-educational work. Relying on Section 27 of the RTE Act and its own precedents, the Court held that such deployment violated statutory prohibitions. The writ petition was allowed, though no specific order was made in the main text.

What did the court decide?

The order deploying teachers for non-educational purposes is set aside; authorities directed to issue instructions for strict compliance with Section 27 of the RTE Act.

Krishna and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 986 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Krishna And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avanish Tripathi,Dheeraj Kumar Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

Grievance of the petitioners is that authorities of State and Parishad are appointing them as Booth Level Officer and various works which are not required to be performed by teachers have been entrusted to them.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners, a primary teacher (Shiksha Mitra) places reliance upon section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 as well as rules framed thereunder. Section 27 of the Act of 2009 as well as rule 21(3) of the Rules of 2011 reads as under:-

¶9

"Section 27. Prohibition of deployment of teachers for noneducational purposes.- No teacher shall be deployed for any non-educational purposes other than the decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority of the State Legislatures or Parliament, as the case may be.

¶10

Rule 21(3). For the purpose of maintaining the pupil-teacher ratio, no teacher posted in a school shall be made to serve in any other school or office or deployed for any non-educational purpose, other than the decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament."

¶11

Learned counsel has also placed reliance upon an order passed by this Court in Sunita Sharma Advocate High Court & another Vs. State of U.P. & others (P.I.L. No.11028 of 2015), decided on 25.03.2015 and U.P. Pradeshiya Prathamik Shikshak Sangh, Band & another Vs. State of U.P. & others (Writ Petition No.34082 of 2017) , decided on 02.08.2017. Operative portion of the order dated 2.8.2017 reads as under:-

¶12

"For the reasons mentioned above, I find that the order of the District Magistrate, Banda is unsustainable and is contrary to

¶13

Section 27 of Act 2009 and the law laid down by this Court in Sunita Sharma (supra). Accordingly, the order of the District Magistrate dated 28.4.2017 is set aside. A direction is issued to the respondents that in future the services of teachers should be deployed strictly in terms of Section 27 of the Act, 2009 and they should not be deployed for any other non-educational purposes, which are not mentioned in Section 27 of the Act. Thus, the writ petition is allowed."

¶14

In view of the law laid down by this Court, referred to above, the direction issued by the authorities requiring the petitioner to perform work contrary to section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, is not liable to be sustained.

¶15

In such circumstances, petitioners is permitted to approach respondent nos.1 and 2 in respect of their grievance noticed above, alongwith certified copy of this order, within a period of two weeks from today. The authorities concerned shall issue necessary instructions to the concerned District Magistrates and District Basic Education Officer of different districts to the effect that provisions contained under section 27 of the Act of 2009 shall be scrupulously complied with, and the Assistant Teachers shall not be assigned work in teeth of the provisions, referred to above.

¶16

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.7.2021 S. Rahman

Krishna and Another v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna and Another v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Thakur Radha Govind Chandra Dev Ji Maharaj Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Suraj Mukhi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Pooja Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anand Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Kumar Asthana and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others