IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE AMARAVATI PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 26910 OF 2013 Between; Sri Munnangi Jaipal Minority Aided Primary School, Vijayawada. Krishna District rep. by the Correspondent ivi.J. Mohan ...Petitioner AND 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner & Director of School Education. Govt, of A.P. Saifabad, Hyderabad. 3. The District Educational Officer, Krishna at Machilipatnam / ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction praying that in more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the G.O.Ms.No.40 Education (SE- PSI) Department dated 18.6.2013 and its consequential proceedings of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.10001 B2-1/2010 dated 13.8.2013 for filling of two vacant aided Secondary Grade Teacher posts in the petitioner minority Educational Institution by way of initiating the rationalization process by transferring staff from up one management to another management, as illegal and contrary to the guidelines issued by the Central Government Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of School Education and Literacy in F.No.1-15/ 2010-EE-4 dated 23.11.2010 and also contrary to the rules in The Andhra Pradesh Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010 issued in G.O.Ms.No.20 Education Department dated 03.03.2011 Articles 14, 16, 21-A and 30 of the Constitution and violative of India and consequently direct the respondents to accord permission to the petitioner school to fill up two vacant aided Secondary Grade Teacher posts by constituting Staff Selection Committee as per staff pattern in terms of Rules 12 and 13 of G.O.Ms.No.1 Education Department dt; 01.01.1994 LA. NO: 1 OF 2013fWVMP. NO: 3990 OF 2ni.?| Between: 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner & Director of School Saifabad, Hyderabad. 3. The District Educational Officer, Krishna at Machilipatnam Department^ Education, Govt, of A.P. ...Petitioners/Respondents AND Sri Munnangi Jaipal Minority Aided Primary School District rep. by the Correspondent M.J. Mohan Vijayawada, Krishna ...Respondent/Petitioner Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased vacate the Interim Orders dt 16.09.2013 granted in W.P.M.P. No. 33301 of 2013 in W.P .No. 26910 of 2013. I.A. NO: 2 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 33301 OF 201.?) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to apply and enforce the provisions in G.O.Ms No. 40 Education (SE-PSI) Department dated 18.6.2013 to the petitioner school, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GANGiSETTY RAJESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: APHC010792672013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3330] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 26910/2013 Between: Sri Munnangi Jaipal Minority Aided Primary School, ...PETITIONER AND The Principal Secretary To Government and Others ...RESPONDENT{S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.GANGISETTY RAJESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO.26910 of 2013 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; "...to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the G.O.Ms.No.40 Education (SE-PSI) Department dated 18.06.2013 and its consequential proceedings of the 3''"^ respondent vide Rc.No.1000/B2-1/2010 dated 13.08.2013 for filling up of two vacant aided Secondary Grade Teacher posts in the petitioner minority Educational Institution by way of initiating the rationalization process by transferrir management to another management, as illegal and contrary to the guidelines Issued by the Central Government Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of School Education and Literacy In F.No.1-15/2010-EE-4, dated 23.11.2010 and also contrary to the rules in The Andhra Pradesh Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010 issued in G.O.Ms.No.20 Education Department dated 03.03.2011 and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21-A and 30 of the Constitution India and consequently direct the respondents to accord permission to the petitioner school to fill up two vacant aided Secondary Grade Teacher posts as per staff pattern by constituting Staff Selection Committee in terms of Rules 12 and 13 of G.O.Ms.No.1, Education Department dated 1.1.1994 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ” staff from one '9 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Adinarayana learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education. 3. Both the learned counsel represented and stated that the issue in the present writ petition is covered by the order, dated 05.01.2023 passed in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch and requested this Court to extend the same relief to the present writ petition also. In view of the said representation made by the learned counsel 4. for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition in terms of the orders, dated 05.01.2023 passed in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 and batch. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. Registry is directed to attach the copy of the order, dated 05.01.2023 in W.P.No.30927 of 2022 to this order. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P. VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANTREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner & Director of School Saifabad, Hyderabad. 3. The District Educational Officer, Krishna at Machilipatnam. Department, Education, Govt, of A.P. 4. One CC to SRI. GANGISETTY RAJESWARA RAO 5. Two CCs to GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION Pradesh. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies Advocate [OPUC] High Court Of Andhra Sree *Attach a copy of the order, dated 05.01.2023 in W.P.No.30927 of 2022. HIGH COURT DATED:04/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.26910 of 2013 I DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY Writ Petition Nos.30927. 2888. 4938, 8014. 8197, 30548. 31010, 31039. 31730. 33163, 35592. 37415, 37467, 37508. 38250. 38924. 40923 and 42367 of 2022 COMMON ORD E R:- As the issue involved in all these writ petitions is inter-related, all these writ petitions are taken up together and are disposed of through this common order. 2. The petitioners in these cases are the management of private Schools. The grievance of the writ petitioners in all these Writ Petitions is the action of the official respondents in not permitting the petitioners-institutions to fill up the vacant aided posts in their institutions in accordance with law. 3. Facts in nutshell : All the petitioners-institutions are private aided schools. All the institutions got recognition and thereafter, some posts have admitted into Grant-in-aid by the Government. The appointment of staff in the Aided institutions is governed by Rule-12 of G.O.Ms.No.1, Education, dated 01.01.1994. As per the terms in the said G.O., as and when vacancy arises, the Management shall make an application to the Competent authority, who in turn would grant permission to the 2 Management to constitute staff selection committee consisting of nominee of District Educational Officer (DEO) as well as the subject experts. Thereafter, the Management is free to make appoint from among the selected candidates after following procedure of giving notification in newspaper and also drafting the candidates from concerned employment exchange. (ii) Subsequently, the government issued a memo, dated 20.10.2004 imposing ban on recruitment of staff into Aided institutions. Thereafter, batch of Writ Petitions were filed i.e., W.P.No.9503 of 2005 and batch. After elaborate hearing, all the writ petitions allowed and the ban imposed by the State vide common order, dated 30.07.2013. were government was set aside. Thereafter, the Government filed Writ Appeal No.216 of 2014, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court. Subsequently, the Government preferred appeal in S.L.P.No.8547 of 2014 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, which was also dismissed on 14.09.2015. As there is no other go, the Government issued memo, vide Memo No.18836/SC.PS/A1/2012, dated 04.01.2017 permitting the Aided Institutions, who approached the Court to fill up the vacant posts by lifting the ban. (iii) Subsequently, the government issued School Education (PS) Department, dated 30.06.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.40, as per the the Commissioner of School Education has issued said G.O., proceedings in Rc.No.90/PS-1/2010-3, dated 20.07.2017 directing all the Regional Joint Directors of School Education and District Educational Officers to take necessary action in filling up all the As per the said G.O., and consequential vacancies in the schools. nd respondent, dated 20.07.2017, all the proceedings of the 2 petitioners-institutions requested the Competent authorities to permit them to fill up the vacant posts and to that effect, they made applications on various dates to the respective competent authorities. Subsequently, as per the instructions of the Government, the 2"'^ respondent once again issued proceedings, dated 12.09.2017 Subsequently, the said (iv) keeping the recruitment in abeyance, proceedings were challenged in W.P.No.1041 of 2018 and this Court suspended the said abeyance proceedings, vide orders in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in W.P.No.1041 of 2018, dated 29.02.2020. Thereafter, all the petitioners-institutions made several applications to the Competent authorities seeking permission to fill up vacancies in Aided Schools. Till now, the Competent authorities did not take any decision or granted permission to fill the vacancies in Aided Schools. Aggrieved by the same, all these writ petitioners have come up with the batch of Writ Petitions. 4 4. Perused the entire material on record. This Court has also passed interim orders in most of the Writ Petitions directing the Competent authorities to permit the petitioners-Institutions to fill up vacancies in Aided Schools by considering the proposal submitted by them. In spite of interim orders, the Competent authorities have permitted the petitioners-institutions to fill Consequently, some of the petitioners-institutions filed before this Court and they are pending. not up the vacancies. contempt cases 5. Learned Government Pleader for School Education filed counter-affidavit, inter alia contending that Aided schools should maintain teacher-student ratio as 1:40 for filling up of vacancies and that the petitioners-institutions have to fill up vacancies in Aided schools as per the provisions prescribed under Rule 12(3)(A) G.O.Ms.No.1, Education (PS2) Department, dated 01.01.1994. of 6. Sn N.Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel, scrupulously submitted that so far as the contention of the official respondents with regard to teacher-student ratio is concerned, the same is governed by the schedule prescribed under Sections 19 & 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short, ‘the Act of 2009). For better appreciation, the said Schedule is extracted hereunder: 5 THE SCHEDULE (See Sections 19 and 25 ) Norms and Standards for a School SI.No. Item Norms and Standards Number of teachers Admitted children Number of teachers (a) For First class to 5 Class Up to Sixty Two th Three Between sixty-one to ninety 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 Pupil-Teacher Ratio (excluding Head Teacher) shall not exceed forty. Above two hundred Children (1)At least one teacher per class so that there shall be at least one teacher each for- (b) For Sixth class to eight class and (i) Science Mathematics ; (ii) Social Studies ; (iii) Languages (2) At least one teacher for every thirty-five children Where admission of children is above one hundred— (i) A full time head teacher (ii) Part time instructors (3) for (A) Art Education (B) Health and Physical Education (C) Work Education 6 7. As such this being the Central Enactment, the State government is bound to follow the said Schedule. Further, so far as Rule-12(3)(A) of the Rules, 1993 is concerned, the petitioner- institutions have no objection to follow the Rule 12(3)(A) of the Rules, 1993. For better appreciation of the said provision, the extracted hereunder: same is 12.Appointment of Staff 'Rule 12(3A) : Before filling up of the aided teaching -teaching posts, the educational agency shall necessarily obtain clearance from the Competent authority, to the ejfect that, there are no surplus posts in the concerned district, and if there are suitable surplus candidates, they should be deployed against the said vacancies as per the subject requirements, competent authority shall however obtain the permission from the Government before issuing clearance for filling up ofany aidedposts or non The 8. As per Rule 12 (3A) of the above said Rules, vacancies will be filled up by surplus candidates. At this juncture, learned Senior Counsel states that respondent authorities are not sending surplus candidates and they are sending candidates only by way of adjustment and thereafter, recalling them, which happened in many cases. At this juncture, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to 7 inform the stand of the Government with Rule 12. affidavit of the Commissioner of School Education, affidavit reads as follows : regard to sub-rule 3(A) of In such circumstances, learned Government Pleader filed Para-5 of the said Further to submit that instructions issued to all the Regional Joint Directors of School Education and District Educational Officers with were a request to identify the surplus teachers/ existing teachers of defunct aided schools as per Rule 10(12) in G.O.Ms.No.l, Education, dated 01.01.1994 and transfer the surplus teachers as per Rule 10 (17) in G.O.Ms.No.l, Education, dated 01.01.1994 on a permanent basis and the same is underprocess”. 9. In view of the above stand taken by the Government, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of with the following directions : The respondent-authorities are hereby directed to permit the petitioners-institutions to fill i) up all the Aided vacancies in terms of G.O.Ms.No.l, Education, dated 01.01.1994 and also as per the Schedule prescribed under Sections 19 & 25 of the Act,2009 ; 8 In future also, whenever vacancies arise, the institutions ii) have to make applications to the Competent authorities for filling up the vacancies ; iii) On such applications, the Competent authorities shall inform the institution about the availability of qualified surplus staff, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of application and allot said surplus staff on permanent basis ; iv) If surplus staff are not available, the Competent authority shall inform the same and permit the petitioners- institutions to fill up the vacancies in accordance with the above said Rule, preferably within a period of two (02) months; V) So far as minority institutions are concerned, the above procedure is not applicable insofar as allotment of surplus staff are concerned, in view of the Judgments of Division Bench of this Court rendered in Modem High School, Zamisthanpur V. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others^ and Ester Axene Res. High School and Others V. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others^. ' 2002(1)ALD 96 ^ MANU/AP/0045/2019 9 The entire exercise shall be completed by the Vi) respondent-authorities within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. K.SURESH REDDY,J 5^^ day of January,2023. Note : LR Copy to be marked B/o RPD