Disposed

Hindu Aided Upm School v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Dec 2024WP/28074/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An aided school sought mandamus to fill vacant aided posts, alleging arbitrary refusal by education authorities contrary to prior orders and the RTE Act. The court disposed of the petition in terms of its earlier identical order, directing the competent authority to allot qualified surplus staff or permit filling of vacancies within three months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed in terms of order dated 15.11.2024 in W.P. No. 20062 of 2024; competent authority to allot surplus staff or permit filling of vacant aided posts within three months; no costs.

Hindu Aided Upm School Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR n

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 28074 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Hindu Aided U.P School, Kothapalle, Giddalur Mandal, Prakasam District Rep. by its Correspondent, Sri K. Pichi Reddy ...Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Department of School Education for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, A.P-522503.

¶11

The Director of School Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Near Happy Resorts, Aatmakur, Mangalagari, Krishna District, A.P^- 521456.

¶12

The District Educational Officer, Prakasam District,^{PrakasamBhavan} Trunk Road, Ongole, Andhra Pradesh-523001.

¶13

The Mandal Educational Officer, Giddalur Mandal,^{PrakasamDistrict-} A.P. 523357

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the

¶16

¶17

¶18

Respondents in not permitting the petitioner school to fill up the vacant aided posts as illegal, arbitrary, in contravention to the common order passed by this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No. 30927 of 2022^{andBatchdated.} 01-01 2023, in contravention to The Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and rules made there under and violation of Article H, 16, 19, 21(A) of Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents to grant permission to the petitioner school to fill up the vacant aided posts i petitioner Schools as per the provisions of The Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009^and rules made there under.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider according permission to the petitioner School to fill up the vacant aided posts as per the provisions of The Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act., 2009 and rules made there under by considering the application^{dated:03-10-2024} made by the petitioner school pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. C SUNIL KUMAR REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents; GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶23

The Court made the following order:

¶24

APHC010537302024

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3330] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶26

MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 28074/2024

¶30

Between:

¶31

Hindu Aided U.P.School

¶32

...PETITIONER

¶33

AND

¶34

The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶36

1.C SUNIL KUMAR REDDY

¶37

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶38

1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶39

The Court made the following:

¶40

¶41

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶42

WRIT PETITION NO. 28074 of 2024

¶43

ORDER:

¶44

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶45

“...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents in not permitting the petitioner school to fill up the vacant aided posts as illegal, arbitrary, in contravention to the common order passed by this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No. 30927 of 2022 and Batch dated 01-01-2023, in contravention to The Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and rules made there^under and violation of Article 14, 16, 19, 21(A) of Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents to grant permission^tothe petitioner school to fill up the vacant aided posts in petitioner School as per the provisions of The Right of Children to free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and rules made thereunder..."

¶46

Heard Sri C.Sunil Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School Education appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶47

The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by^the order dated 15.11.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.20062 of^2024.

¶48

Learned Government Pleader does not refute the said submission.

¶49

9 5. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid^order, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition in terms of W.P.No.20062 of 2024, dated 15.11.2024.

¶50

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There^shallbeno order as to costs. dated

¶51

Registry is directed to attach a copy of the order 15.11.2024 passed in W.P.No.20062 of 2024 to this order.

¶52

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any.

¶53

shall stand closed.

¶54

SD/- K.SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// fdf,^{SECTIONOFFICER}

¶55

To,

¶56

The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education,^Stateof Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,^{Amaravathi,A.P-} 522503.

¶57

The Director of School Education, Government of^{AndhraPradesh,} Near Happy Resorts, Aatmakur, Mangalagari, Krishna^{District,A.P-} 521456.

¶58

The District Educational Officer, Prakasam District,^{PrakasamBhavan,} Trunk Road, Ongole, Andhra Pradesh-523001.

¶59

The Mandal Educational Officer, Giddalur Mandal,^{PrakasamDistrict-} A.P.523357

¶60

One CC to Sri. C Sunil Kumar Reddy Advocate [OPUC]

¶61

Two CCs to GP for School Education, High Court Of^{AndhraPradesh.} [OUT]

¶62

Three CD Copies

¶63

(Along with a copy of the order dated 15.11.2024 passed^inWPNo. 20062 of 2024)

¶64

GSC

¶65

HIGH COURT DATED:02/12/2024

<br>N

ORDER

WP.No.28074 of 2024

2 0 DEC 202^f m
o e»
^ . Curreni becuon

DISPOSING OF THE WP

WITHOUT COSTS

APHC010390772024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3330]

¶74

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶75

FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶76

PRESENT

¶77

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶78

WRIT PETITION NO: 20062/2024

¶79

Between:

¶80

Hindu College High School Council (Agency) ...PETITIONER

¶81

AND

¶82

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶83

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶84

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶85

1.RAJA MANURI VENKATA SUMANTH

¶86

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶87

1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶88

The Court made the following:

¶89

¶90

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶91

WRIT PETITION NO: 20062 of 2024

¶92

ORDER:

¶93

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶94

“...to issue writ order or orders more particularly^one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not granting permission to fill up the vacant aided^postsinthe petitioner institutions as per the G.O. Ms. No. 40^{dt. 30.06.2017} and consequential proceedings in R.C.No.90/PS-1/2010-3, dated 20.07.2017, despite representations dated 04.03.2024 made by the petitioner as being arbitrary, illegal^{andviolativeof} Article 14 and 19 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 5 to permit the petitioner^institution to fili up 28 vacant aided teaching posts and 7 vacant^aided non-teaching posts as per G.O. Ms. No. 40 dt. 30.06.2017^and consequential proceedings in R.C. No. 90/PS-172010-3^dated 20.07.2017 within a reasonable time..."

¶95

Precisely, the case of the petitioner is that the respondents in not granting permission to fill up the vacant aided posts in the petitioner institutions as per G.O.Ms.No.40, dated^30.06.2017.

¶96

The 4*'^ respondent has filed a counter affidavit in^which it is asserted that, upon receipt of the Government Orders, the 1 St respondent will take necessary action regarding the^filling of vacant posts in accordance with G.O. Ms. No. 59. The competent^authority will then inform about the availability of qualified surplus staff and allot the said surplus staff on a permanent basis. If surplus staff is not

¶97

¶98

■f

¶99

available, the 1 St respondent will notify the same and allow the management to fill all aided vacancies in accordance with the selection procedure prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.1, Education, dated 01.01.1994, and as per the schedule prescribed under^Sections 19 and 25 of the RTE Act, 2009.

¶100

It is relevant to extract para 9 of G.O.Ms.No.59, School Education (PS) Department, dated 22.06.2023, that it indicates the procedure for filling up of teacher posts in aided schools, which reads as follows:

¶101

For filling up of teacher vacancies in private aided management, the Regional Joint Director of School Education is competent authority for High School and the District Educational Officer is competent authority for Primary^and Upper Primary Schools.

¶102

i. Shall permit the aided management to fill up all^the Aided vacancies in terms of selection procedure prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.1, Education, dated 01.01.1994 and as per the Schedule prescribed under Sections 19 and 25 of^theRTE Act, 2009;

¶103

a. In future, whenever vacancies arise, the concerned aided management have to make applications to the competent authorities for filling up the vacancies; Hi. On such applications, the competent authorities^shall inform the management/institution about the availability of qualified surplus staff, within a period of four (04)^weeksfrom the date of application and allot said surplus staff on permanent basis;

¶104

iv. If surplus staff are not available, the competent authority shall inform the same and permit the

¶105

¶106

management/institutions to fill up the vacancies in accordance with the above said Rule, preferably within a period of two (02) months;

¶107

Upon careful examination of the counter filed by the 4 th respondent, it is noted that G.O.Ms. No. 59 prescribes the procedure for filling vacant aided posts. In accordance with the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.59, the competent authority, namely the 3'"'^ respondent herein, is directed to ascertain the availability of qualified surplus staff within the district and to allocate such surplus staff to the management/institution on a permanent basis. If no surplus staff is available, the competent authority shall inform the management/ institution accordingly, permitting them to fill the vacancies in accordance with the rules prescribed in G.O. Ms. No. 59 dated 22.06.2023 and G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 01.01.1994. It is to be understood that the process of the filling of the teacher posts shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt^oftheorder.

¶108

With the above said directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶109

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any. shall stand closed.

¶110

JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶111

Date: 15.11.2024 SPP

Hindu Aided Upm School v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindu Aided Upm School v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Tungala Venkateshwara Rao, Vs a.P.Cooperative Housing Societies Federation Ltd.

Vsr Plantations Vs the District Registrar

Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Handloom Weavers Cooperative Productio Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Munugavalasa Venkata Narasimha Murthy, Vs The Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Andhra Pradesh

The District Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Panchumarthi Sujatha Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh