Teachers appointed in unaided posts are entitled to consideration for absorption into aided vacancies if their appointments were valid and similar cases were absorbed.

ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioners’ case for absorption in their respective aided vacancies, as per the proposal of the 5^th respondent school, as was done in cases of all other similarly placed persons in the 5th respondent school and other schools.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

(a) The petitioners were appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the 5^th respondent-School. As there exists clear aided vacancies as shown in the proposal of the 5th respondent, the petitioners’ proposals were sent by the 5^th respondent. As per G.O.Ms.No.60, Education (PE) Department, dated 28.01.1986, the School (private aided) Management was given powers to appoint teachers. G.O.Ms.No.524, Education (PE) Department, dated 20.12.1998, was issued by the Government for recruitment of teachers in private aided schools. While the said G.O. was in operation, the petitioners were appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers in various subjects, after selection by the Management, after conducting a teaching test, after satisfying with the petitioners’ performance, as they possessed requisite qualifications.

(b) While so, the petitioners’ seniors have approached this Court and obtained the order for absorption into the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. Pursuant thereto, the respondents have absorbed the petitioners’ seniors on various dates specified in the proposals sent by the 5^th respondent vide proceedings Rc.No.1400/D2-4/98, dated 11.04.2002 and L.Dis.No.163/02-4/2002, dated 26.08.2003.

(c) The cases of similarly situated persons, like the petitioners, in the other schools were also absorbed into aided vacancies. Therefore, the petitioners are also eligible for absorption from the date on which the vacancies are available.

3. Learned Government Pleader for School Education appearing for respondents No.1 to 4, filed counter affidavit along with vacate stay petition, as follows :-

(a) The petitioners were appointed by the Management of the School in the unaided vacancies of SGTs on a consolidate pay of Rs.2,000/- or Rs.1,200/- or Rs.1,000/- without seeking permission from the competent authority for filling up the vacancies and without following the procedure contemplated in Rule 12 of G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 01.01.1994 as amended from time to time. The appointment of the petitioners in the unaided posts of SGT was in violation of Rule 12 of G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 01.01.1994. The petitioners were appointed after issuance of the said G.O., which was issued in supersession of G.O.Ms.No.524, dated 20.12.1988. Though the petitioners have rendered long years of service in the unaided posts of SGTs, they were not absorbed into the aided posts of SGTs., as their appointments were not made as per Rules.

(b) So far, the Management has not submitted any proposal to the competent authority with regard to the mode of recruitment of the petitioners and whether it has followed the Rules at the time of making their appointment in the unaided posts. The correspondent of the 5th respondent School submitted individual letters on 10.11.2014 requesting to absorb the petitioners into grant-in-aid posts of School Assistant from the unaided posts of SGTs.

(c) As a policy decision, the Government imposed ban on creation and filling up of aided vacancies in the recognized aided Schools vide Memo dated 20.10.2004. The Government also extended the said ban orders for promotion and compassionate appointment vide Memo No.558/PS1/2005.

(d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order, dated 06.11.2011 in SLP No.9541/2007 held that the ban order