Teachers must possess requisite educational qualifications to ensure quality education, and experience cannot substitute for formal training in seeking Grant-in-Aid.

JUDGMENT :

PER DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD, J.

Schools need not half-baked teachers, inasmuch as hospitals need not half-baked doctors. What havoc a half-baked doctor can play with the patient, is just nothing compared to what a half-baked teacher would do to the society. Showing leniency in matters of educational qualification for teachers, would be like rewarding unworthiness. This should be the prelude to the judgment in making.

This statutory appeal under section 24C of the Odisha Education Act, 1969 seeks to call in question the order dated 05.02.2019, whereby the State Education Tribunal at Bhubaneswar has negatived appellant’s GIA Case No. 87 of 2008. In the subject GIA, the prayer was for a direction to the Managing Committee of the Respondent-School to recommend her candidature for approval at the hands of jurisdictional authority.

2. The impugned order, being short & crisp both on law & facts, merits reproduction:

“Learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel are present. Heard.

The applicant, who is working as an Assistant Teacher in Belasaunlia Girls High School at Belasaunlia in the district of Bhadrak, in this application U/s.24-B of the ORISSA EDUCATION ACT , 1969 has sought for a direction to the Managing Committee of the School to recommend her name for approval.

Form the record it does not appear when the applicant was regularly appointed and her appointment was regularly made against an admissible post. In that view of the matter the prayer of the applicant is not acceptable.

Accordingly, this GIA application being devoid of any merit is dismissed.”(sic)

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant urged the following three points for voiding the impugned order:

(i) The Tribunal grossly erred in proceeding with a wrong legal premise that it is only the trained teacher, who is entitled to Grant- in-Aid, when that was not the requirement for initial appointment under the extant Rules.

(ii) Assuming the reasoning of the Tribunal as to the requirement of Trained Graduate for appointment is true, even then the long experience itself fills the lack vide Apex Court decision in Bhagwati Prasad v. Delhi State Mineral Development AIR 1990 SC 371.

(iii) The impugned order is not a speaking one, and that it suffers from crypticity and therefore, should be treated as unreasoned.

4. Learned AGA appearing for the official respondents vehemently resists the appeal contending that in the absence of educational qualification, no appointment could have been made and therefore, one who is appointed despite lacking the qualification cannot seek conferment of Grant-in-Aid. The 1987 Circular being as clear as crystal, prescribed ‘Trained Graduate’ as the qualification for appointment to the post of teacher in private unaided schools. Secondly, the profession of teaching is pivotal to the society and therefore, howsoever long the experience be, that cannot be a substitute for the requirement of educational qualification and therefore, Bhagwati Prasad supra cannot be pressed into service. Lastly, the impugned order, far from being cryptic, is properly reasoned decision and therefore, does not call for interference.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parities and having perused appeal papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the submission of learned AGA, for the following reasons:

5.1. The Apex Court has highlighted the importance of role which teachers do play in inculcating the values in the younger generation and instructing it to evolve as ideal citizenry. The observations in the following two decisions eminently merit reiteration:

(i) State of Maharashtra v. Vikas Sahebrao Roundale, (1992) 4 SCC 435:

“12. … … The teacher plays pivotal role in moulding the career, character and mo