IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly, JJ.
Moosa, Manager, Amlp School and ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Kerala and ors.– Respondent
WP(C). No.16198, 17534, 29964 of 2010, 27670, 27993 of 2015
Decided on : 24-02-2021
Education - Teachers' Political Activities - Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualifications) Act, 1951; Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - The court ruled that aided school teachers cannot contest elections, prioritizing the constitutional right to education of children over political participation of teachers.
Fact of the Case:
Writ petitions were filed challenging the eligibility of aided school teachers to contest elections, arguing it dilutes educational standards and violates the Right to Education, invoking the Legislative Assembly Act that removes disqualifications for teachers.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that aided school teachers hold an office of profit under the government due to the substantial control exercised by the state over their employment, thus disqualifying them from contesting elections.
Issues: Whether aided school teachers can contest elections, given their roles and responsibilities under the Right to Education Act and the implications of the Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualifications) Act, 1951.
Ratio Decidendi: The provisions of the Legislative Assembly Act allowing teachers to contest were held invalid in light of the Right to Education Act, which prioritizes uninterrupted educational duties over political participation.
Final Decision: Aided school teachers are disqualified from contesting elections based on their status as holders of an office of profit under state control.
JUDGMENT :
S. Manikumar, J.
Instant public interest writ petitions are filed generally with prayers for issuance of a writ, order, or direction, declaring that the teaching staff of aided schools are not entitled to contest in the election to the local bodies, including State Legislative Assembly and Parliament. As they are working in aided schools, petitioners, inter alia, have sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring that the exemption, if any, granted to the aided school teachers, permitting them to contest in various elections conducted by the Election Commissions, as nonest in the eye of law, and to declare the same as void.
2. In W.P.(C) No.17534/2010, the petitioner therein has sought for a direction to the State and the Director of Public Instructions, to make suitable amendments in the Kerala Educational Rules, 1956, to give effect to the directions stipulated in the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
3. In W.P.(C) No.27670/2015, the petitioner therein has sought for a direction declaring that aided school teachers are not entitled to be engaged in political activities and to contest for election to Local Self Government bodies under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, as well as the Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to the State officials, to issue necessary orders prohibiting aided school teachers from engaging in political activities and contesting the election to Local Self Government bodies under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, as well as the Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994.
4. However, distinct from the reliefs sought for in other writ petitions, in W.P.(C) No.29964/2010, the petitioner therein has sought for a declaration that any provision permitting contest in elections to the Parliament, State Assembly or Local Body by the teachers of private educational institutions, both under aided and unaided sector, shall be unconstitutional and violative of Articles 21, 21A, 41 and 46 of the Constitution of India.
5. That apart, petitioner therein has also sought for a declaration that Section 2(1)(iv) of the Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualifications) Act, 1951 permitting the office holders in private educational institutions to be members of the local bodies or Central or State Legislative bodies, is in violation of Articles 41 and 46, and ultravires to Articles 21 and 21A of the Constitution of India and quash the same.
6. For appropriate disposal of the writ petitions, we deem it fit that the parties can be referred as they are arrayed in W.P.(C) No.29964/2010, and to rely on the basic contentions raised, as well as the counter affidavit filed thereto by the State Government.
7. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.29964/2010, is a retired Director of Doordarshan, Mangalore Station, and was serving as the Director of Audiovisual communication in Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), Kochi, at the time of filing the writ petition. According to him, the experience gained by him for having served under the mass communication field over last three decades, having authored stage plays and children books, conveying the message for social working, has constrained him to file the writ petition, to prevent the massive participation of the teachers, working in private educational institutions, including Government aided colleges and school, in active politics and contest in elections to the Parliament, State Assembly, and local bodies, by diluting the quality of service to the cause of education and breeding fissiparous and divisive tendencies among the students and society, on account of petty political considerations.
8. Petitioner therein has further stated that while service rules applicable to the Government teachers interdict the involvement in active politics and contest in elections, the teachers in private sector, discharging the very same functions, are freely allowed to actively participate in politics, including makin
Asharaf Kokkur v. K.V. Abdul Khader and Ors.
Bachahan Devi and Ors. v. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and Ors.
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and Ors.
Bhagwan Dass Sehgal v. State of Haryana and Ors.
Bihari Lal Dobray v. Roshan Lal Dopray
Biharilal Dobray v. Roshan Lal Dobray
Budhan Choudhary v. State of Bihar
Confederation of Ex-Servicemen Association v. Union of India
D.R. Gurushantappa v. Abdul Khaddus Anwar and Ors.
Deewan Singh and others v. Rajendra Pd. Ardevi and others
Delhi and Another v. Anand Vardhan Chandal
Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Ors.
Divya Prakash v. Kultar Chand Rana and Ors.
Dr. Deorao Laxman Anande v. Keshav Laxman Borkar
Election Commission of India v. St. Mary's School and Ors.
Gopala Kurup v. Samuel Arulappan Paul and Ors.
Gurugobinda Basu v. Sankari Prasad Ghosal
Harakchand Ratanchand Banthia v. Union of India
In Re : Special Courts Bill, 1978
Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka
Jaya Bachchan v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
K. Krishnamacharyulu and others v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering and another
K. Thimmappa v. Chairman, Central Board of Directors, SBI
Kanta Kathuria v. Mank Chand Surana
Khandige Sham Bhat v. Agricultural Income-Tax Officer
Kona Prabhakar Rao v. M. Seshagiri Rao
L. Hirday Narain v. Income Tax Officer, Bareilly
L.I.C. of India and Another v. Consumer Education & Research Centre and Others
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Mangalam Organics Ltd. v. Union of India (UOI)
Mini Venugopal v. State of Kerala and others
Mohd. Shujat Ali v. Union of India
Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka
Probhudas Morarjee Rajkotia v. Union of India
Rakesh Gupta v. State of Hyderabad
Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Justice S.R. Tendolkar
Ravanna Subanna v. G.S. Kaggeerappa
Miss. Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka and Ors.
S.G. Jaisinghani v. Union of India
Satrucharla Chandrasekhar Raju v. Vyricherla Pradeep Kumar Dev and Others
Satrucharla Chandrasekhar Raju v. Vyricherla Pradeep Kumar Dev
Shayara Bano v. Union of India
Shibu Soren v. Dayanand Sahay and Ors.
Shibu Soren v. Dayanand Sahay and Ors.
Shivamurthy Swami Inamdar v. Agadi Sanganna Andanappa
Shrikant v. Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur Division and Ors.
Smt. Bachahan Devi and Anr. v. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and Anr.
Sri Srinivasa Theatre and others v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others
State of Gujarat and Ors. v. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni and Ors.
State of H.P. v. Recognised & Aided Schools Managing Committee
State of Jammu & Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa
State of Kerala and Ors. v. Kandath Distilleries
State of Meghalaya and Ors. v. All Dimasa Students Union, Dima-Hasao District Committee and Ors.
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Shiv Kumar Pathak and Others
State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar & Another
Unni Krishnan, J.P. and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
Venkateshwara Theatre v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
Western M.P. Electric Power & Supply Co. Ltd. v. State of U.P.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.