Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1857 (TS)

G. Rajini v. State of Telangana

2025-12-17

NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

body2025
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. 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 orders are applicable from the date of issuance of the orders and the proposals submitted by the Management for absorption of the un-aided Teachers to the aided posts sent prior to issuance of the ban orders and pending with the competent authorities can be processed as per the Rules and issue orders. After verification of the original records, the respondents have issued orders in respect of all deserving candidates. (e) Some of the managements of private aided schools and teachers working in the unaided posts in the recognized aided schools again approached this Court in a batch of cases seeking a direction to the respondents to allow them to fill up aided vacancies available in their Schools in respect of the teachers working in the unaided posts, without reference to ban Memo.No.12080/ COSE/2004, dated 20.10.2004. This Court vide its order dated 23.08.2013 in W.P.No.4207 of 2005 and batch and in WP.No.21981/2005 made the following order :- “Consequently, this batch of Writ Petitions is allowed. This Court vide its order dated 23.08.2013 in W.P.No.4207 of 2005 and batch and in WP.No.21981/2005 made the following order :- “Consequently, this batch of Writ Petitions is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners for absorption/appointment either SGTs or School Assistants, as the case may be disregarding the Government Memo dated 20.10.2004, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this orders. It is clarified that the same is also applicable to non- teaching staff, who are covered by the Government Memo.” (f) Aggrieved by the said order, the Government filed W.A.No.216 of 2014 and the Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 25.02.2014 in W.A.M.P.No.663/2014 in W.A.No.216/2014 passed the interim order by allowing the Managements to fill up the aided vacancies pending outcome of the final orders in the Writ Appeal. Challenging the said order, the Government filed S.L.P.No.8597 of 2014 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 28.03.2014 granted interim stay of the order of the Division Bench of this Court. Thus, at present, the ban orders are in force and there is no absorption to the posts of grant-in-aid, as it would lead to violation of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. (g) There is no provision in Rules for absorption of un-aided SGTs into grant-in-aid posts of School Assistants though there are vacancies. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the 5 th respondent, filed counter affidavit as follows:- (a) The 5th respondent appoints the teachers, who possess the requisite qualification as per the Government norms from time to time, by following the selection process, to meet the work load and the said process was being followed since decades. The 5 th respondent pays very meager salaries to the Teachers, as it is a private aided school and collects very minimum fee from the students. (b) The 5 th respondent school has a very few sanctioned aided posts. As and when aided vacancy arises, the 5th respondent would send proposal for senior most teachers, who are eligible for absorption to an aided vacant post. The cases of similarly situated persons, like the petitioners, were considered for absorption and retired from the aided post. (b) The 5 th respondent school has a very few sanctioned aided posts. As and when aided vacancy arises, the 5th respondent would send proposal for senior most teachers, who are eligible for absorption to an aided vacant post. The cases of similarly situated persons, like the petitioners, were considered for absorption and retired from the aided post. The 5 th respondent would allot work to the petitioners similar to the aided teachers and there is no difference in the nature of work and the educational qualifications, except salary. 5. Heard Sri Poodatu Amarender, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for School Education, appearing for respondents No.1 to 4 and Sri M. Ravi Mohan, learned Standing counsel appearing for respondent No.5. Perused the record. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the cases of similarly situated persons were considered and absorbed into aided vacancies. Any errors committed by the Management of the 5th respondent-school, such as, failing to send the proposals as soon as the petitioners became eligible and as soon as the vacancies arose, cannot deprive the petitioners of their right to be absorbed into the aided vacancies. The petitioners cannot be penalized for any delay in sending the proposals by the 5th respondent-school. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submits that though the petitioners are eligible and entitled to the aided posts, the respondents have not considered their cases. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition by directing the respondents to consider the petitioners’ cases for absorption into their respective aided vacancies, as per the proposal of the 5 th respondent and allow the writ petition. 8. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that since the petitioners’ appointment in the unaided posts of SGTs by the Management was in violation the rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.1, Education, dt.01.01.1994, the petitioners are not eligible for absorption into the grant in posts of SGT and there is no provision or Rules for absorption into Aid post of School Assistant directly from the unaided post of SGT. Further, the Government issued Ban orders in respect of creation and filling up of aided posts and the same is in force, in view of the stay orders granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Further, the Government issued Ban orders in respect of creation and filling up of aided posts and the same is in force, in view of the stay orders granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, it is not feasible to consider the cases of the petitioners for absorption into the grant in aid posts of School Assistant from the unaided posts of Secondary Grade Teacher. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 9. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 5 th respondent submits that as and when aided vacancy arises, the 5th respondent would send proposal for senior most teachers, who are eligible for absorption to an aided vacant post. The cases of similarly situated persons, like the petitioners, were considered for absorption and retired from the aided post. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition. 10. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that on 26.03.2015 this Court while admitting the writ petition granted interim order directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for absorption in their respective aided vacancies in the 5th respondent School as shown in their proposals. Aggrieved by the said interim order, the Government filed W.V.M.P.No.3950 of 2015 and the same is pending. 11. In the instant case, the 5 th respondent sent proposals to the 2 nd respondent on 10.11.2014 and 12.12.2014 for absorption of the petitioners in the aided vacancies. The main grievance of the petitioners is that though the cases of similarly situated persons were considered for absorption into the aided vacancies, their cases were not considered even though they are eligible and entitled for absorption. 12. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents relied upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in W.A.No.90 of 2025, dated 26.03.2025. The said Writ Appeal was filed by the Government aggrieved by the order dated 26.09.2022 passed in W.P.No.19615 of 2015, wherein the proposal sent by the 5 th respondent therein in the month of October, 2013 is pending before the 3 rd respondent therein. In those circumstances, this Court allowed the said Writ Petition directing respondent Nos.1 and 3 to approve the proposal of the 5th respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 13. In those circumstances, this Court allowed the said Writ Petition directing respondent Nos.1 and 3 to approve the proposal of the 5th respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 13. In W.A.No.90 of 2025, dated 26.03.2025, the Division Bench of this Court, while upholding the reasoning of the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 19615 of 2015, dated 26.09.2022, modified paragraph No. 13 of the impugned order by directing the 4th respondent to take a decision on the proposal within a period of two months. 14. In the case at hand, the 5th respondent sent proposal to the 2nd respondent on 10.11.2014 and 12.12.2014 for absorption of the petitioners in the aided vacancies and in the present writ petition, the petitioners herein sought relief of their absorption in the aided vacancies as was done in the case of similarly situated persons in the 5 th respondent School. 15. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents in the counter affidavit stated that S.L.P.(C).No.8547 of 2014 is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and any absorption would lead to the violation of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Further, the petitioners are not appointed as per the Rules and Regulations and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for absorption in the aided vacancies. 16. In the instant case, on 26.03.2015, this Court granted interim order directing respondents 1 to 4 herein to consider the case of the petitioners for absorption in their respective aided vacancies in the 5 th respondent School as shown in their proposals. The 5th respondent also sent proposals on 10.11.2014 and 12.12.2014 for absorption of the petitioners in the aided vacancies. So far, respondent Nos.1 to 4 neither accepted nor rejected the said proposals. As on today, the respondents No.1 to 4 have not taken any decision on the said proposals. Moreover, SLP (C).No.8547 of 2014, which was pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, was dismissed on 14.09.2015. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners have rendered considerable length of service in the unaided posts without any complaint. Further, the cases of similarly situated persons were considered for absorption in the aided vacancies. Therefore, the petitioners’ case can be considered for absorption in the said aided vacancies. 17. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners have rendered considerable length of service in the unaided posts without any complaint. Further, the cases of similarly situated persons were considered for absorption in the aided vacancies. Therefore, the petitioners’ case can be considered for absorption in the said aided vacancies. 17. In view of the foregoing discussion, respondent Nos.1 to 4 are directed to consider the proposals of the 5 th respondent dated 10.11.2014 and 12.12.2014 and take a final decision for absorption of the petitioners in the aided vacancies and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 18. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.