The Allahabad High Court has upheld the state government’s policy of merging primary school and upper primary school running in the same campus.
A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery heard the petition filed by Hina Khaleeq and others.
In this bunch of writ petitions, mainly a Government Order dated 22.11.2018 is under challenge. In some writ petitions, respective representation of petitioners were rejected on basis of above referred Government Order and said orders are also impugned.
Counsel for parties have not disputed that earlier at some place, within one premises, two sets of schools were running for primary section with independent working and administration, (a primary school from class I to V and an upper primary school from VI to VIII). Appointments and promotions were made in terms of Act and provisions of Rules as applicable.
The Court observed that,
An argument was raised that the Government Order dated 22.11.2018 was illegal since it was not based on a decision of the Board, however, from bare perusal of the communication dated 30.10.2018, said argument does not survive since a policy decision has been taken in order to facilitate better administration in a meeting dated 27.10.2018 conducted by U.P Basic Education Board and other reasons also. A copy of minutes of meeting dated 22.10.2019 is not placed on record by the respondent State but without any substantial material, existence of meeting and a decision taken therein could not be put under doubt.
No argument is raised that the above referred object and reasons assigned for decision of consolidation are without basis or not beneficial to students.
The petitioners are mainly aggrieved that in certain cases prospect of a Junior Headmaster to become Head Master in composite schools may be curtailed since it was decided that senior most amongst primary and upper primary would become Head Master as well as at the time of consolidation, a Head Master already working in either school has to discontinue being Head Master in one of schools as other working Headmaster was senior to him or her. It is observed that the policy has been in existence for the last 5 years.
Some writ petitioners have challenged the impugned decision on ground that there is no provision that primary school and upper primary school may be composite in one premises, however, no substantial provision has been placed that such procedure is barred on record except that there is a Schedule of the Act of 2009 which provides different manner of selection of Teachers in primary and upper primary schools.
None of the petitioners is aggrieved that despite being senior, he/she has not been given charge of Head Master of composite school.
The Court noted that it may likely to prejudice future prospect of some Teachers who were or likely to become Principal of either primary school or upper primary school as according to policy after consolidation, a senior to them would become Principal of consolidation school, however, only due to a reason that scheme may prejudice some Teachers to become Principal would not be a sole ground to quash the policy specifically when policy is beneficial to students.
It is not a case of any writ petitioner that they have to serve under a Head Master junior to him. No substantial argument was mentioned that a decision to consolidate schools was legally wrong or decision was not accompanied by reasons or Government Order is ultra-vires to provisions of law, therefore, all contentions raised have no legal basis and are accordingly rejected by the high court.
Court still takes note that a legitimate right to become Principal may not be absolutely curtailed, therefore, in order to proper implementation of provisions of impugned G.O and its para 10, the Court directed that State Government shall constitute a Committee. It will also address genuine grievances, if any, so that discontent may not occur between co-employees.
“The Committee will also consider that if necessary, certain amendments be carried out in relevant Act or Rules to cure any ambiguity if pointed out by stakeholder and if necessary policy may also be modified to some extent.
The Committee as constituted will take a reasoned decision after considering suggestions from stakeholders before commencement of new academic session 2025-26″, the order reads.