APHC010010262025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No: 511/2025 Between: Chowdeswari Devi Oriental High School ...PETITIONER AND The State Of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BHARAT BABU.N Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: "…..to issue a Writ or order or direction, more particularly, a Writ of mandamus i. to declare the proceedings of 4th respondent vide Rc.No.561/D/A2/B1/2011 dated 26.07.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unsustainable in law; ii. also declare that the Petitioner-School is entitled to fill up 13 aided posts and denial of permission in respect of 7 posts i.e. 4-SGBT, 1-SP Gr.II, 1-Craft Teacher and 1- Attender as illegal, motivated and discriminatory. iii. Consequently direct Respondent No.4 to accord permission to fill up 7 posts namely SGBT-4, SP Gr.II-1, Craft Teacher- 1 and attender-1. iv. and pass such other order or orders….." 2. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh issued Memo No.12080/COSC/A2/2004-4, dated 20.10.2004, banning the recruitment of aided posts in the private aided management schools in violation of A.P.Education Act, 1982, and other laws. Assailing the said memo, a batch of Writ Petitions came to be filed and the same was set aside by the composite High Court in W.P.No.9503 of 2005 and batch and the petitioners herein also filed W.P.No.23918 of 2010, which was allowed 3 on 20.08.2013 in the line with the said judgment dated 30.07.2013, declaring the ban memo illegal and unconstitutional. The composite High Court while allowing the Writ Petition, directed the State to accord permission to fill up the aided vacancies as per law. The same was confirmed upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Accordingly, the State Government has withdrawn the memo banning the recruitment of the aided posts. 3. Subsequently, the petitioner made a request to the 4th respondent-The District Educational Officer to accord permission to fill up the following aided vacancies, lying vacant since so long due to ban memo dated 20.10.2004. The particulars of the vacant posts are as follows: School Assistants (Social) 1 Hindi Pandit Gr-I 1 Hindi Pandit Gr-II 1 SGBT 5 SP Gr-II 2 PET 1 Craft Teacher 1 Attender 1 Total 13 4 4. It is further asserted that the total strength of the school for the academic year 2003-2004 was 794. For classes I to V was 373 while classes VI to X were 421 students. As per the Teacher Pupil Ratio, the petitioner is entitled to fill up all the vacant aided posts, but curiously, the 4th respondent accorded permission only for two posts, i.e., School Assistant and Hindi Pandit Gr-I, vide order dated 17.10.2023. Aggrieved by the action of the District Educational Officer, the petitioner herein submitted a representation dated 31.10.2023 to the respondent Nos.1 to 3, requesting to accord permission to fill all the aided vacancie as stated in paragraph No.3. 5. The 2nd respondent i.e., the Commissioner and Director of School Education conducted an enquiry into the matter by giving notice to the petitioner and satisfied with the particulars submitted in respect of the strength of school and eligibility to fill up all the vacant aided posts and directed respondent No.4 to accord permission. 6. Despite direction by the 2nd respondent, the 4th respondent has issued proceedings Rc.No.561-D/A2/B1/2011 dated 24.01.2024, permitting to fill up SGBT-2, HP Gr-II, SP Gr-I (total 4) excluding two posts of School Assistant-1, HP Gr-II which were already permitted vide orders dated 17.10.2023 and the respondents have restricted to six posts, in total as against 13 posts. 7. The petitioner once again, made a representation to respondent Nos.1 to 3 on 27.01.2024, requesting to conduct an enquiry and the respondent No.4 conducted enquiry, submitted report dated 06.06.2024 to the 2nd respondent stating that the petitioner-school is eligible for filing 5 up of six additional vacant posts, based on the strength of the school and in compliance with RTE norms. Shockingly, the respondent No.4, contrary to own report dated 06.06.2024, issued proceedings in Rc.No.561/D/A2/B1/2011 dated 26.07.2024 declaring that there are three surplus posts of SGT in the primary section of the petitioner- school and in the high school section, it was stated that there is requirement of one SGT, one SA-Sanskrit and one PET only and surplus 3 SGT were to be utilized to address the deficit SGT post in the high school sections. 8. Furthermore, observed that for the Sanskrit Pandit post, it was already accorded permission on 24.01.2024 and permitted to fill up PET post against roster point No.2(SC) and thus petitioner-school was permitted to fill up the following posts only: Date of order Posts permitted to fill up No. 17.10.2023 School Assistant Hindi Pandit 1 1 2 24.01.2024 SGT HP Gr-II Sanskrit Pandit Gr-II 2 1 1 4 Grand Total 6 26.07.2024 1. Basing on the strength of school as on 18.06.2024, it was held that the primary section of Petitioner – School is eligible for only 5 SGT as against 11 sanctioned posts and 8 working and 3 are surplus. 2. In High School section, as against 16 sanctioned posts 12 are working and 3 required to be appointed. 6 9. Assailing the said proceedings dated 26.07.2024 issued in Rc.No.561/D/A2/B1/2011, the present Writ Petition came to be filed on the ground that the impugned order is patently illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and the conclusion arrived at by the respondents is entirely baseless, relying upon the alleged school strength of 2024, i.e., neither accurate nor supported by records. Further, the order is completely disregards the mandate of Teacher Pupil Ratio prescribed under the Right to Education Act and the guideline. Even if sanctioned aided post I to be taken away on the lowered strength, the prescribed procedure has to be followed. The authority is obligated to grant the institution two academic years to recoup the student strength, only if the institution fails to achieve the requisite strength, then only the sanctioned post be withdrawn from the institution and the entire calculation of Teacher Pupil Ratio, as made by the respondent No.4, is in patent violation of the guidelines prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.40 dated 19.06.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.59 dated 22.06.2023 and would prejudice the petitioner. 10. Hence, prayed to set aside the impugned proceedings dated 26.07.2024 and consequently to direct the respondents to fill up 13 aided posts. 11. The 4th respondent filed counter affidavit on behalf of all the respondents. It is necessary to extract the relevant paragraph Nos.11 to 14 of the counter affidavit, it is hereby extracted in the following: "11. The correspondent, Chowdeswari Devi Oriental High School, Y.M. Palli, Kadapa (M), YSR District in his representation dt.05.03.2024 7 stated that the school was entitled to 6 posts viz., SGT-4, SP (Gr.II)-1 & PET-1 in addition to already permitted six (6) posts as per the staffing pattern prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.59 School Education (PS) Department, dt.22.06.2023. Enrolment and the staff position submitted by the Correspondent is as follows: I. STRENGTH PARTICULARS FOR THE YEAR 2022-23 (Dated 30.04.2023) S.No. School Name Medium 1st class 2nd class 3rd class 4th class 5th class 1 to 5 6th class 7th class 8th class 9th class 10th class 6 to 10 1 Chowdeswari Devi Oriental High School, Y.M. Palli, Kadapa (M), YSR District EM 36 23 53 61 43 216 43 26 38 23 18 148 TM 3 20 14 60 60 157 62 56 56 58 41 273 Total 39 43 67 121 103 373 105 82 94 81 59 421 II. DETAILS OF POSTS SANCTIONED, WORKING AND VACANT IN THE SCHOOL: PRIMARY Sl. No. Name of the Post Sanctioned Posts Working Vacant Posts Posts permitted by the DEO, YSR District for D.R. Balance of posts requested. 1. SGT 12 8 3 0 3 2. Sanskrit Gr.II 1 1 0 0 0 12 9 3 0 3 HIGH SCHOOL Sl. No. Name of the Post Sanctioned Posts Working Vacant Posts Posts permitted by the DEO, YSR District for D.R. Balance of posts requested. 8 1. HMT 1 1 0 0 0 2. SA (MATHS) 2 2 0 0 0 3. SA (SCIENCE) 1 1 0 0 0 4. SA (SOCIAL) 1 1 0 0 0 5. SG ASST. 2 1 1 0 1 6. SA (TELUGU) 1 1 0 0 0 7. T.P. Gr.II 1 1 0 0 0 8. HP Gr.I 1 1 0 0 0 9. HP Gr.II 1 1 0 0 0 10. S.P. Gr.I 1 1 0 0 0 11. S.P.Gr.Ii 2 0 2 1 1 12. PET 2 1 1 0 1 13. DRAWING 1 1 0 0 0 14. CRAFT 1 0 1 0 1 TOTAL 18 13 5 1 4 GRAND TOTAL 30 22 8 1 7 12. Further, it is respectfully submitted that, the Director, Coordination, O/o the Commissioner of School Education, A.P., Amaravati made a visit to the school on 10.11.2023. On verifying the roll mentioned in the attendance registers in all the classes with respect to the physical attendance, it was noticed as 429/723. Again, the District Educational Officer, YSR District made a visit to the school on 18.06.2024 and verified the roll mentioned in the attendance registers in all the classes with respect to the physical attendance, physical attendance in the school in all the classes was 322 to that of registered 543 enrolments. 9 13. Further, it is respectfully submitted that, considering the present enrolment in the school for the current academic year i.e., 2024-25 (as on 18.06.2024) to that of working staff position in the school, the requirement of staff in the school as per RTE Act, 2009 and other guidelines of the Government is shown below: PRIMARY SECTIONS (I-V) – Roll: 138 HM MATHS SCIENCE SOCIAL SGT SA – TELUGU LP – TELUGU SA- HINDI LP-HINDI SA-SKT LP-SKT PET TOTAL No. of aided posts sanctioned 11 1 12 Working as on date 8 1 9 VACANT 3 0 3 Teachers required as per RTE norms 5 1 6 Teachers required as per RTE norms within the Sanctioned Posts 5 1 6 Surplus teachers 3 3 HIGH SCHOOL (VI-X) (EM & TM) Roll = 405 HM MATHS SCIENCE SOCIAL SGT SA – TELUGU LP – TELUGU SA- HINDI LP-HINDI SA-SKT LP-SKT PET TOTAL No. of aided posts sanctioned 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 16 Working as on date 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 VACANT 1 2 1 4 Teachers required as per RTE norms 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 17 Teachers required as per RTE norms within the Sanctioned Posts 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 15 Teachers required 1 1 1 3 10 From the above, the Management has three surplus SGTs in the primary sections. The services of these three SGTs may be utilized to that of one deficit SGT post in the high school sections. For the deficit LP (Sanskrit) post in the high school sections, the Management was already been permitted to fill the post vide this office Progs. Rc.No.561-D/A2/b1/2011, DT.24.01.2024. But, the post was yet to be filled. For the deficit PET post, the Petitioner has been directed to fill the eligible vacant PET post by way of direct recruitment against the roster point no.2 (SC) duly following the procedure prescribed vide G.O.Ms.No.1 Education, dt.01.01.1994 vide Progs. Rc.No.561-D/A2/B1/2011, dt.26.07.2024 of the District Educational Officer, YSR District and also the Petitioner had been informed that his request to accord permission to fill up the vacant aided posts limited to sanctioned aided posts in the school will be considered only after the improvement of enrolment in the school. 14. Further, it is respectfully submitted that, by considering the enrolment in the school for the current academic year 2024-25, one post of PET is found to be deficit in the school. The Management had already been permitted the Petitioner for filling up of the vacant post of PET post by way of direct recruitment. Once the management fill up this deficit PET post in the school, the school will have required teacher-pupil-ratio in the school as prescribed vide RTE Act, 2009." 12. The impugned proceedings indicate that the request of the petitioner to accord permission to fill up the vacant limited sanctioned aided posts will be considered only after the improvement of the enrollment in the school. 13. As seen from the counter filed by the 4th respondent, the Director, Coordination, Office of the Commissioner of School Education, A.P., Amaravati, made a school visit on 10.11.2023 and, on verifying the roll mentioned in the attendance registers in all the classes with respect to 11 the physical attendance, it was noticed as 429 instead of 723. Again, the District Educational Officer, YSR District made a visit to the school on 18.06.2024 and verified the roll mentioned in the attendance registers in all classes with respect to the physical attendance, physical attendance in the school in all classes was 322 to that of registered 543 enrolments. Basing on the present enrollment in the school for the current academic year 2024-2025 as on 18.06.2024 to that of working staff position in the school, the requirement of the staff in the school as per RTE Act, 2009, and the other guidelines of the Government noted three surplus Teachers in Primary Sections and Teachers requirement for High School is three. Accordingly, issued the impugned proceedings allowing the petitioner-institution to fill up the posts as follows: Sl.No. Category of Post 1 Secondary Grade Teacher-2 2 3 Hindi Pandit (Gr.II) 4 Sanskrit Pandit (Gr.II) 14. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri P.Gangaiah Naidu, appearing for Sri N.Bharat Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Sri Ramachandra Rao, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 15. At the outset, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as outlined in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the petitioner is aggrieved with the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to fill up 13 posts considering the strength of 12 the school as on 20.03.2004, which is stated in the paragraph No.3 and even assuming that the sanctioned aided posts are taken away to the lower strength, the respondents have not followed the prescribed procedure obligatory to grant to recoup the students strength. Hence, prayed to direct the respondents to permit to fill up 13 aided posts by the petitioner institution. 16. It is the contention of the respondents that as on the verification of the rolls mentioned in the attendance register in all the classes with respect to the physical attendance, it was noticed that the strength was lowered from 723 to 429. As per the report submitted by the Director, Coordination, in all the classes with respect to the physical attendance, as per the school visit on 18.06.2024, on verification of the rolls mentioned in all the classes, the physical attendance in the school in all the classes was 322 to that of registered 543 and hence in view of Section 25 of the A.P.Right to Education Act, considering the Teacher Pupil Ratio, the impugned proceedings were issued and also stated that the respondents will accord permission to the petitioner-school only after improvement of enrollments in the school. 17. After considering the arguments of learned counsels for both sides, the Court delivers the following order: 18. Succinctly the case of the petitioner’s institution is that the school is entitled to fill up the 13 aided posts as per the sanctioned strength basing upon the admissions of pupils for the academic year as on 2003 - 2004 is 723 when the ban is imposed not fill up the teachers. 13 19. It is the contention of the respondents that as per the enquiry in the presence of the petitioner institution the strength of the school is lowered to 429 than the strength of the pupils in the year 2003 - 2004 and as per Section 25 of the Right to Education Act the petitioners institution is entitled only for 6 aided posts accordingly permitted the petitioner institution to appoint 6 aided posts indicating that the request to accord permission to fill up the vacant aided posts to sanctioned aided posts in the school will be considered after the improvement of enrolment in the school. 20. It is imperative to extract relevant provisions of the Right to Education Act for disposal of the writ petition 21. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act or Right to Education Act (RTE), is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted on 4th August 2009, which describes the modalities of the importance of free and compulsory education for children between 6 and 14 in India under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution. 22. Section 25 of the Act pertains to maintaining pupil-teacher ratio and states that within three years from the date of commencement of the Act, the appropriate government and the local authority shall ensure that pupil-teacher ratio as specified in the schedule is maintained in each school. 23. In terms of sections 19 and 25 of the Act, the schedule prescribes norms and standards for a school with item No.1 pertaining to number of teachers required. 14 The Schedule (See sections 19 and 25) Norms and Standards for a School Sl. No. Item Norms and Standards 1. Number of teachers: (a) For first class to fifth class Admitted children Number of teachers Up to Sixty Two Between sixty-one to ninety Three Between Ninety-one to one hundred and twenty Four Between One hundred and twenty-one to two hundred Five Above One hundred and fifty children Five plus one Head teacher Above Two hundred children Pupil-Teacher Ratio (excluding Head-teacher) shall not exceed forty. (b) For sixth class to eighth At least one teacher per class so that class there shall be at least one teacher each for- (i) Science and Mathematics; (ii) Social Studies; (iii) Languages. (2) At least one teacher for every thirty- five children. (3) Where admission of children is above one hundred - (i) a full time head-teacher; (ii) part time instructors for - 15 (A) Art Education; (B) Health and Physical Education; (C) Work Education. 24. (a) The respondents have permitted the petitioner-institution to fill up the following aided posts as stated below: Sl.No. Category of Post 1 Secondary Grade Teacher-2 2 3 Hindi Pandit (Gr.II) 4 Sanskrit Pandit (Gr.II) (b) The three surplus SGT posts in the primary sections were permitted to be utilized to that of one deficit SGT post in the high school sections. (c) Vide proceedings in Rc.No.561-D/A2/b1/2011 dated 24.01.2024, permitted to fill one LP (Sanskrit) post. (d) Vide Proceedings Rc.No.561-D/A2/B1/2011, dated 26.07.2024, permitted to fill up PET post on roster point No.2 duly following the procedure prescribed vide G.O.Ms.No.1 Education, dated 01.01.1994. Total 9 posts were sanctioned to the petitioner’s institution, for claim of 13 posts. 25. Section 26 of the Act pertains to filling up of vacancies of teachers with appointing authority duty bound to ensure that vacancy of teachers in school under its control shall not exceed 10% of the sanctioned strength. 16 26. Section 35 of the Act conferred powers on the Central Government, appropriate government or the local authority to issue guidelines for the purposes of implementation of provisions of the act. 27. The Government has got the authority and legal right to maintain standards in education and to enhance the quality of education inter alia to evaluate the teacher; pupil ratio. A committee was constituted to know the strength of the students and the committee's report noted the total strength for the year 2023 to 2024 was lowered to 429 out of 723 in comparison with the academic year 2003 - 2004 accordingly the impugned proceedings issued allowing the school to appoint 6 teachers in the context of Section 25 of Right to Education Act. It is not the contention of the petitioner institution that impugned proceedings is not in accordance with the Section 25 of the Right to Education Act more over the petitioner institution has accepted the school's strength in ground no.4 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition was lowered, but the petitioner institution argues that the lowering of the teacher ratio is a procedure that is contemplated and that if the procedure is not followed, the petitioner institution is entitled to fill the 13 vacancies as raised in the representation. The committee was established to determine the strength of the students, and the committee's report noted that the total strength for the year 2023 to 2024 was lowered to 429 out of 723. 28. To substantiate the petitioner school has not shown any provision, rule, or law that the school should be permitted to appoint teachers as per the vacancy aroused in the year 2003 - 2004. When 17 section 25 of the Right to Education act says or mandates to maintain pupil-teacher ratio. However, the petitioner school failed to provide any clause, regulation, or legislation stating that the school should be allowed to fill up the vacancies as aroused in the year 2003-2004 as against to section 25 of Right to Education Act to appoint teachers as per the vacancy aroused in the year 2003-2004 to fill up the 13 vacancies as aroused in 2003-2004. 29. To fill up the vacancies in the context of Section 25 of the Right to Education Act the beginning of the academic year of school has to be taken into account. As per the committee report the strength in the petitioners institution was lowered in comparison to the present academic year 2023 to 2024 to the admissions made in the year to 2003 - 2004. And section 26 of the Right to Education Act make it clear that even though the sanctioned strength is fixed by the Government, the Government/appointing authority is free to take a decision not to fill up 10% of the total sanctioned strength. 30. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pine Chemical Ltd. v. Assessing Authority and others1, held that if power to do an act or pass an order can be traced to an enabling statutory provision then even if that provision is not specifically referred to, the act or order shall be deemed to have been done or made under the enabling provision. 31. This Court cannot order the respondents to permit the school to appoint teachers in the past when the student-to-teacher ratio is lowered and against the lack of express authority in that regard. In light 1 (1992) 2 SCC 683 18 of those facts, I do not find the petitioner school's claim that the government lacks the authority to issue the impugned proceedings persuasive. Where in the impugned proceedings it is stated if the school improves the strength the same will be considered and the school to appoint teachers. 32. The right to seek a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is based on the existence of a legal right and the corresponding duty with the answering respondent to carry out the legal duty to direct appoint teachers as on the date of vacancies aroused in the year 2003 - 2004. Thus, the petitioner has no right and could not maintain the writ petition demanding to appoint teachers as per the pupil ratio as per the academic year 2003 - 2004 for the academic year 2023 -2024 when the pupils strength is lowered. 33. I see no merit in the argument of the petitioner institution. Hence, the present Writ Petition lacks merit. 34. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 25.02.2025 Siva/Harin 19 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.511 of 2025 Date:25.02.2025 Siva/Harin