Back
1995 Supreme(Del) 366
High Court Of Delhi
VINA AGGARWAL - Appellant
Versus
MANAGING COMMITTEE, SHRI LAKSHMI NARAIN TRUST,GUJARAT SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL - Respondent
Civil 4693 of 1994
Decided On : 05/01/1995
ADARSH GOEL, J.K.SETH, S.K.Shukla
The experience of a person as a Lecturer in a Degree College can be counted towards their experience as a Post-Graduate Teacher for the purposes of considering their qualifications for getting the post of Principal in a Higher Secondary School.
Headnote:
EDUCATION - APPOINTMENT OF PRINCIPAL - QUALIFICATIONS - EXPERIENCE AS LECTURER IN DEGREE COLLEGE - COUNTING TOWARDS EXPERIENCE AS POST-GRADUATE TEACHER - DELHI EDUCATION RULES - INTERPRETATION.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a TGT in a school, challenged the appointment of respondent as the Principal of the school, alleging that she did not have the necessary qualifications and experience. The petitioner also claimed that the selection process was not fair and transparent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent had the necessary qualifications and experience for the post of Principal. The court also found that the selection process was fair and transparent. The court dismissed the petition.
Issues: 1. Whether the respondent had the necessary qualifications and experience for the post of Principal. 2. Whether the selection process was fair and transparent.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the respondent had the necessary qualifications and experience for the post of Principal. The court noted that the respondent had a Master's Degree, a Degree in Teaching, and more than 10 years of teaching experience as a PGT. The court also held that the respondent's experience as a Lecturer in a Degree College could be counted towards her experience as a Post-Graduate Teacher. 2. The court held that the selection process was fair and transparent. The court noted that the Selection Committee had interviewed all the candidates who had applied for the post and that the respondent had been selected on the basis of her qualifications and experience.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition.
( 1 ) RULE D. B. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties at length. Learned Counsel for the parties have also taken us through the various documents on record. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of this petition finally.
( 2 ) PETITIONER Veena Aggarwal is working as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) with the respondent No. 1 Gujarat Senior Secondary School. She had joined the said School about 29 years ago. She is also one of the members of the Managing Committee of the said School. On 14. 4. 1993, respondent No. 4, Manager of the Institute which runs the said School issued an advertisement inviting applications for appointment to the post of Principal for the said School. Petitioner, Veena Aggarwal, as also respondent No. 4 Seema Aggarwal, had applied for the said post. Interviews for selection were held on 6. 8. 93 and in the said selection Ms. Seema Aggarwal was selected and she joined as Principal on 2. 9. 1993.
( 3 ) PETITIONER has averred that the said school is governed by the Delhi Education Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Though she was fulfilling all the necessary qualifications for appointment as the Principal, the Selection Committee was not pleased to select her. It is her further claim that the selection of respondent No. 4 is illegal and improper as she was not having the necessary qualifications and experience of 10 years as TGT. She came to know about the Institute s decision to relax the condition of the said qualification only on 22. 4. 1994.
( 4 ) ON 27. 7. 1994 there was meeting of the Managing Committee of the School and in the said Managing Committee Meeting she had objected to the selection of respondent No. 4 as Principal and had contended that the relaxation in her favour was illegal and that her selection and appointment as Principal should be cancelled. Because of the said stand taken by her respondent No. 4 started harassing her and has issued various memos and has threatened her to take disciplinary proceedings against her in order to silence her. She has, therefore, filed the present petition with the prayer to the Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari against respondents 1,2 and 3 and to quash the appointment of respondent No. 4 as the Principal of the said School and to further restrain respondent Nos. 1,2 and 3 from confirming respondent No. 4 and from suspending the petitioner or taking any disciplinary proceedings against her in pursuance of the memos issued by respondent No. 4.
( 5 ) RESPONDENTS 1,3and4 have contested the claim of the petitioner by filing the counter affidavits. It has been contended that the petition filed by the petitioner is not at all bona fide and. honest. Even though she is very well aware that respondent No. 4 Ms. Seema Aggarwal has been confirmed as Principal on 1. 9. 1994 after the completion of the probation period, she has come before this Court to get an order to prevent her confirmation. If is further contended that the petitioner has not even disclosed all the true and relevant facts and has concealed material facts from this Court in order to mislead the Court. The Departmental Promotion Committee met on 19. 2. 1993 and in the said Departmental Promotion Committee Meeting all the Post-Graduate teachers of the School were considered and found unsuitable to shoulder the responsibility of Principal of the School. Against the said decision the petitioner had not made any representation to her appointing authority, i. e. , the School Management or respondent No. 2 the Director of Education. Thereafter, the Management had decided to give an advertisement and, accordingly, an advertisement was issued. In pursuance of the said advertisement internal teachers, including the present petitioner and outsiders had applied for the said posts. Their applications were scrutinised and On 6. 8. 1993 six internal teachers, including the petitioner and eight external teachers, including respondent No. 4 Ms. Seema Aggarwal, were interviewed by the Selection
