2001 Supreme(AP) 1397
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : BILAL NAZKI, ELIPE DHARMA RAO
Modern High School, Zamisthanpur, Musheerabad, Hyderabad - Appellant
Versus
Government Of A.P., Education Department, Hyderabad - Respondent
Decided On : 11-09-01
Headnote:
Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions Act, 1982 - Sec. 99 - constitution of India,1950 - Article 30 (1) - Staff teaching as well as non- teaching shall be recruited - Writ Petitions raise common questions of law and fact as in all petitions virus of has been challenged - Petitioner institutions are minority educational institutions - Some of these institutions are admitted to grant-in-aid by Government and some of them are unaided institutions - In terms of powers conferred on Government amendment to rule is challenged in all these writ petitions as illegal - It is contended that impugned G. O. contravenes the right of managements of the Educational institutions guaranteed - Educational agency shall appoint staff as per staffing pattern prescribed by Government from time to time – Held, Judgment of supreme Court in Tribal Education agriculture and Medical Society State - In this judgment Rule of Rules made was subject matter of controversy before court and of judgment are reproduced - In writ petition petitioner society has challenged validity of Rules but notice issued by court is confined to question of validity of Rule which relates to recruitment by absorption of teachers or other employees of other institutions whose services have been terminated – Varghese counsel appearing for petitioner society has urged that clause (a) of rule when read with proviso to rule means that minority educational institutions are required to give preference to persons mentioned in clause and that they have no choice in matter of judging suitability of such persons - Writ Petitions allowed
( 1 ) THESE Writ Petitions raise common questions of law and fact as in all petitions vires of G. O. Ms. No. 76, dated 2-11-99 has been challenged.
( 2 ) THE admitted facts are that, the petitioner institutions are minority educational institutions. Some of these institutions are admitted to grant-in-aid by the Government and some of them are unaided institutions. In terms of powers conferred on the Government under Sec. 99 of the A. P. Educational Institutions Act, 1982 rules were framed by the Government being g. O. Ms. No. 1, Education (P. S. 2) department, dated 1-1-94. Rule 12 of these rules deals with the appointment of the staff. By virtue of G. O. Ms. No. 76 dated 2-11-99 rule 12 was amended retrospectively with effect from 5-8-98. The amendment to rule 12 is challenged in all these writ petitions as illegal. It is contended that the impugned G. O. contravenes the right of managements of the Educational institutions guaranteed under Article 30 (1) of the constitution of India.
( 3 ) THE short question before this Court is, whether the impugned G. O. is depriving the managements of the institutions rights guaranteed under Article 30 (1) of the constitution. It is no where contended in the counter-affidavit that Government has a right to restrict the power of the managements of the minority institutions, but it is contended that the Government has the power to regulate the education, educational standards and allied matters of the minority institutions as well.
( 4 ) NOW, in the light of these pleadings let us examine what Rule 12 says. Rule 12 is reproduced. "12. Appointment of staff - (1) The educational agency shall appoint staff as per the staffing pattern prescribed by Government from time to time. All staff shall conform to the qualifications prescribed by Government from time to time. (2) All the staff teaching as well as non- teaching shall be recruited through staff Selection Committee to be constituted by the educational agency in accordance with these rules. (3) All the posts shall be advertised in atleast two newspapers having large circulation which one shall be in telugu. (4) All educational institutions receiving grant-in-aid from government shall notify vacancies to the Employment Exchange and in addition, advertisement in the news papers, that they shall also be required to call the candidates sponsored by employment Exchange for test and interview provided that the persons applying to the post in response to the advertisement in the newspapers should have got registered their names in any Employment Exchange in the state. (5) Aided schools shall also be required to have a nominee of the District educational Officer not below the rank of Deputy Educational Officer in the staff Selection Committee. The educational agency shall fix the selection process (test/interview) in consultation with the District educational Officer or his nominee and shall afford the D. E. O s nominee a reasonable opportunity of being present. The selection however, shall not be vitiated only on the ground of the absence of D. E. O s nominee if the educational agency has offered reasonable explanation. The burden of proving this shall lie with the educational agency. (6) The selection of the posts in all private educational institutions shall conform to the communal rotation roster. However, this shall not apply to minority educational institution only if they are selecting a candidate belonging to the concerned minority community. Where such a candidate is fitted in a vacancy belonging to SC/st vacancy shall be carried forward to the next point. (7) The procedure in respect of aided schools as indicated in sub Rules 4,5 and 6 above shall apply whether the selection is for an aided post or an unaided post. (8) All appointments made either of teaching or non-teaching staff by aided or unaided institutions shall be subject to the approval of the competent authority. For this purpose the educational agency shall inform