SUPRIME CORTS WRITTEN ORDER GUEST VS. PAS CASE

SLP(C)...CC 5956-5957/12,etc.
1
ITEM NOs.MM-2-F COURT NO.2 SECTION IVB and MM-2-G
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petitions(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC 5956-5957/12
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution against the final judgment and order dated 30/03/2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No.6090 of 2010 and against the final judgment and order dated 15/03/2012 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Misc.No.17483 of 2011)
NARESH KUMAR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.ETC. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for permission to file SLP and with prayer for interim relief )
WITH SLP(C) NO. 10818 of 2012 (With appln.(s)for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and permission to place addl.documents on record and with prayer for interim relief and office report)
Date: 30/03/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. G.E.Vahanvati, A.G.I. in SLP(C)10818/12 Mr. H.S. Hooda, A.G.Haryana. Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhijat P.Medh, AOR.
Sri Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Adv. in SLP(C)..../12 Ms. Indu Malhotra, Sr. Adv. CC 5956-5957/12 Ms. Mahalakshmi Pavani, Adv. Sri G.Balaji, Adv. SLP(C)...CC 5956-5957/12,etc.
2
Ms. Chinmaya Chandra, Adv. Sri Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. for M/S.Mahalakshmi Balaji & Co.,Advs.
For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. John Mathew,AOR.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
1. Permission to file SLPs granted.
2. Three Special Leave Petitions have been
filed,two by Mr. Naresh Kumar & Ors., in
SLP(C)......CC Nos.5956-5957 of 2012,against
the final judgment and order dated 30th March,
2011, passed in CWP No.6090 of 2010 and the
final judgment and order dated 15th March, 2012,
in Civil Misc.No.17483 of 2011, passed by the
Punjab & Haryana High Court, and SLP(C)No.10818
of 2012, filed by the State of Haryana against
the final judgment and order dated 15th March,
2012, passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court
in C.M.No.17483/11 in Civil Writ Petition
No.6090 of 2010.
3. The subject-matter of all the three
Special Leave Petitions is with regard to the
appointment of 'Guest Teachers' and their
continuance, without recruitment of teachers in
3
the various educational institutions, by the
regular process of recruitment. The issue
involved appears to have been considered by the
Punjab & Haryana High Court, in several matters,
since quite some time.In fact, we have been
able to glean from the facts as disclosed that
this issue came up for consideration before the
Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High
Court in CWP No.6090 of 2010, which has been
questioned in SLP(C)......CC 5956-5957 of 2012.
The said writ petition was disposed of by the
judgment and order of the Punjab & Haryana High
Court dated 30th March, 2011, wherein it was
mentioned that the specific challenge which had
been made in the writ petition was with regard
to the decision of the respondents to extend
the services of 'Guest Teachers' appointed under
contract basis in various Government schools of
the State of Haryana. In the said Writ
Petition, it was also indicated that the
extension was proposed for a further period of
one year with effect from 1st April,2011.
Incidentally, the respondent No.6 in the said
writ petition is duly represented before us and
4
he is a candidate for consideration for
appointment in the regular course.The said
Writ Petition was disposed of in terms of a
schedule, which had been prepared by the
respondent-authorities, and the Division Bench
of the Punjab & Haryana High Court made it very
clear that while it would be open to the State
to extend the tenure of the'GuestTeachers' at
all levels, such extension should not be beyond
31st March,2012. It was also indicated that on
the expiry of the said date, i.e.31st March,
2012, services of all the 'Guest Teachers'
should be understood to have lapsed in terms
of the said judgment and it would not be open
for the State to continue such 'Guest Teachers'
in service. It is,in fact, the said
directions which had led to the filing of the
Special Leave Petitions. The Division Bench
had also indicated that there would be no
further appointment of 'Guest Teachers' during
the next Academic year, starting from 1st April,
2011, and the short-fall,if any, in the
availability of teachers would have to be made
up by the State by undertaking a fresh process/
5
exercise of posting and re-posting of teachers
according to the needs of each school.
Various other directions were also given
regarding appointment of teachers on regular
basis.
4. Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned senior
advocate, appearing for the petitioners in the
said Special Leave Petitions, has submitted that
the direction referred to hereinabove given by
the Division Bench of the High Court would
create a situation in which after 1st April,
2012, there would be no teachers available in
place of the 'Guest Teachers' and unless the
directions was extended till at least regular
appointments were made, the students in the
various institutions would suffer. Of course,
Mr. Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel, has
also voiced his apprehension that this may lead
to continuance of the process of continuing with
the 'Guest Teachers'.
5. The other Special Leave Petition has been
filed by the State of Haryana, in regard to the
order passed by the Division Bench of the High
Court on 15th March, 2012,in C.M.No.17483/11 in
6
Civil Writ Petition No.6090 of 2010. By the
said order, the Division Bench of the High Court
rejected the prayer of the State of Haryana for
extension of time to implement the directions
contained in the order dated 30th March, 2011.
The learned Attorney General for India,
appearing for the State of Haryana, however,
brought to our notice an order subsequently
passed by the same Division Bench on 20th March,
2012, whereby a scheme for filling up the vacant
posts in order to comply with the directions
contained in the order of 30th March, 2011, had
been placed before the Court and the same had
been accepted, in fact, a prayer had been made
for about ten months' time to give effect to the
said scheme. The learned Attorney General for
India pointed out that in the said order, the
Court had observed that in view of the scheme it
was no longer necessary for the Court to monitor
the actions of the State any further. On the
contrary, the Court deemed it appropriate to
close the writ petition, which was in the nature
of a public interest litigation, by directing
the State of Haryana to initiate and comply with
7
and take necessary action in terms of the
averments made in the affidavit dated 19th March,
2012, affirmed by the Financial Commissioner and
Member Secretary to the Government of Haryana,
School Education Department, and to adhere to
the time schedule mentioned in the said
affidavit.
6. The learned Attorney General for India,
submitted that there being two contrary
directions, one passed on 15th March, 2012, and
the other on 20th March, 2012, accepting the
scheme, and, in fact, extending the time for
giving effect to the scheme, the State of
Haryana had filed the Special Leave Petition to
clarify the differences in the two orders.
7. Having heard the learned Attorney General
for India, Mr. Subramanium and Mr. Vishwanathan,
learned senior advocates, for the parties and
also keeping in mind the submissions made by Mr.
Vishwanathan, that the intention of the Division
Bench of the High Court was that no further
appointments of 'Guest Teachers' should be made
after 1st April, 2012, and that the vacancies
should be filled up by posting and reposting
8
teachers in the different institutions, we feel
that the two things should really be kept
separate,notwithstanding the apprehension
voiced by Mr. Vishwanathan, that this could lead
to continuance of appointment of 'Guest
Teachers'.
8. We make it very clear that as directed by
the Division Bench of the High Court, no fresh
appointments of 'Guest Teachers' will be made
from 1st April, 2012. However, since students
also cannot be made to suffer on account of the
delay in the appointment of regular teachers, we
direct that the exercise indicated in the
scheme,must be completed within the time
specified in the scheme and no further extension
or deviation therefrom will be permitted.
9. Till then, the 'Guest Teachers' may be
allowed to continue to function, as they have
been doing so far.
10. We once again reiterate that the
recruitment of teachers on the regular basis
shall not be supplemented or replaced by this
procedure of appointing 'Guest Teachers' for
the sake of convenience.
9
11. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed
of with the aforesaid observations.
12. There will be no orders as to costs.
(Sheetal Dhingra) (Juginder Kaur) COURT MASTER Assistant Registra