High Court upholds two circulars of DSE

Updated on: Monday, December 27, 2010

The Madras High Court has upheld the authority of the Director of School Education (DSE)/Director of Elementary Education to issue two circulars in 1994 which gave a direction that appointments arising out of vacancies even in respect of aided schools should be stopped temporarily.

The communications were in force from June 1, 1994 to May 31, 1995.
Common judgment

In its common judgment allowing a batch of writ appeals by the government challenging a single Judge's order of August 1999 quashing the circulars, a Division Bench comprising Justices R. Banumathi and B. Rajendran held that the circulars were not unconstitutional. They were well within the authorities' powers.

Earlier, the aided schools had challenged the circulars, dated April 25 and May 20, 1994, stating that they were arbitrary and illegal. The schools said the State was prevented from withholding the services of teachers to students. They also sought a direction to the authorities to approve the appointments of qualified teachers in the vacancies in the schools.

A single Judge held that by imposing a ban on filling vacancies of teachers, the fundamental right of pupils to education was affected.

Aggrieved, the government filed appeals.

The Additional Advocate-General, P.Wilson, said any law intended to regulate the service conditions of the employees of educational institutions and any law regulating the grants did not amount to interfering with the overall administrative control of the management over the staff. It was well within DSE's powers to issue such instructions.

In its judgment, the Bench said by virtue of the two circulars, the government had given a direction that the appointments arising out of vacancies, including on the death or retirement of a teacher, even in respect of aided schools, should be stopped temporarily. Subsequently, it was stated that the ban was for one year.

The ban was intended for the ostensible purpose to regulate the appointments to suit the convenience for appointing teachers by considering the relevant teacher-pupil ratio.

The government thought it fit to regulate, upgrade and maintain high standards in respect of the ratio. Therefore, merely because the ban was in force, it could not be said that it infringed rights of schools.

In December 1997, the government fixed the ratio for elementary schools, high schools and higher secondary schools with effect from June 1, 1998.

The Bench said the respondents had no grievance to be ventilated by virtue of a G.O. in 1998 by which all appointments which were made during the period were regularised.

High Court upholds two circulars of DSE

More Education news