The High Court directed the release of Grant-in-Aid to a drawing teacher in a Government school, ruling that the State's long-term acquiescence in her service makes it unjust to deny arrears, even absent a specific policy at her engagement.
Directed release of Grant-in-Aid effective 16.08.2014 and payment of arrears within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:HHC:6929
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 2047 of 2023 Decided on: 08.08.2024
Rajni Sharma … Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No
____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
CMP No.7694 of 2024
This application is allowed by directing that the documents appended therewith are taken on record.
CWP No.2047 of 2023
“ i) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure P-5 i.e. impugned office order dated 06-01-2023 issued by the respondent No.2.
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent authorities to grant the grant-in-aid to the petitioner with effect from 20-09-2014 on the same analogy as has been ordered by this Hon’ble Court in Villam Singh’s case which has attained finality and has been implemented as well as alongwith arrears and interest, in the interest of justice and fair play .”
Learned counsel for the petitioner states at the Bar that
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
1
2
2024:HHC:6929
the petitioner is not pressing the relief of regularisation and she is restricting her relief only for the release of Grant-in-Aid, which has not been paid to her on the ground that she stands engaged by the School Management Committee.
“ a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as Drawing Teacher in Government Senior Secondary School, Shorahan, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. and pay her salary/honorarium as per the PTA/SMC Scheme and they may also be directed to pay the full honorarium/salary which they have illegally deducted previously as initially they have paid only Rs.2000/- per month instead of Rs.2500/- and thereafter Rs.1500/- instead of Rs.2500/-. The respondents be directed to pay all the arrears. Alternatively petitioner may be given preference in case of fresh appointment on SMC/PTA basis.
b) That the respondents may further kindly be directed
3
2024:HHC:6929 that no fresh appointment be made on the SMC/PTA basis for the post of Drawing Teacher in which the petitioner has been working since, 2011 onwards and her services are being terminated orally for no reasons. ”
“ 2. It is the case of the petitioner that she was appointed as Drawing Master on SMC/PTA basis consequent upon an interview held on 22.04.2011, in GSSS Shorshan, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi. The office order dated 29.04.2011, appointing the petitioner as such, has
been placed on record as Annexure P-2.
It is an admitted position that pursuant to the interim order passed in the matter on 01.07.2014, the petitioner is still continuing to serve as SMC/PTA appointed Drawing Master.
3. During hearing of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner placed on record a communication dated 10.10.2022 issued by respondent No.1, inter alia, to respondent No.2. The communication is under the subject ‘Regarding regularization of the services of the PTA’s provided teachers (School Cadre) working under GIA to PTA’s Rules, 2006 engaged/re-engaged after closing of PTA GIA Rules, 2006’. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner is covered in terms of the decision taken in the aforesaid letter. He further submitted that the petitioner would be content in case respondent No.2-the Director Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, is directed to consider the case of the
4
2024:HHC:6929 petitioner vis-à-vis her grievances pointed out in the instant petition in light of the aforesaid communication dated 10.10.2022. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this request.
4. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and without adverting to the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2 to examine the case of the petitioner vis-à-vis the grievances highlighted by her in the instant petition in accordance with law and in light of the communication dated 10.10.2022, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so
taken be also communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any .”
5
2024:HHC:6929 closure of the PTA Policy who fulfilled the requisite qualification as per the Recruitment & Promotion Rules by extending the PTA Policy/Rules, 2006 from prospective effect.
6
2024:HHC:6929
2011, is not a private school, but is a Government school. If the respondent-department was of the opinion that engagement of the petitioner was bad, then nothing prevented the department from calling either the Principal or the School Management Committee of the school concerned to do away with the service of the petitioner. However, as this was not having done, it amounts to acquiescence on the part of the State as far as engagement of the petitioner as a Drawing Teacher in the school by the School Management Committee is concerned. Otherwise also, as the State has utilised the services of the petitioner in its school for more than one decade now, it cannot be permitted to say that petitioner is not eligible for the release of Grant-in-Aid on the ground mentioned in the reply, for the reason that when respondents have allowed the petitioner to serve in the said school and to impart education to the students in the said school, it would be highly unjust on the part of the Court not to grant the relief of at least release of Grant-in-Aid in favour of the petitioner.
7
2024:HHC:6929 11. Accordingly, this Writ petition is disposed of with the direction that let the Grant-in-Aid be released in favour of the petitioner from 16.08.2014, i.e. the date on which Notification dated 16.08.2014 was issued. Needful with regard to the payment of arrears be done within a period of three month from today.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge
August 08, 2024 (Rishi)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a drawing teacher engaged in a Government school by the School Management Committee is entitled to Grant-in-Aid despite lack of a specific policy at the time of engagement.
Whether the State's acquiescence in allowing the petitioner's service for over a decade precludes denying Grant-in-Aid now.
Whether the impugned order rejecting regularisation is the subject of adjudication given the petitioner's restriction to Grant-in-Aid relief.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Villam Singh's caseReferred¶15
Villam Singh's case
Rajni Sharma
State of Himachal Pradesh
Ajay Mohan Goel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
