Telangana High Court
G. Sucharitha vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others on 17 March, 2025
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.7442 of 2023
ORDER:
Heard Sri V.V. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
"...to declare the action of the Respondents in not considering the case of the Petitioner for admission and absorption in grant-in-aid post inspite of the recommendation made by the 3rd Respondent to the 2nd Respondent vide Lr. No. 6840/E4/2013, dated 27-07-2013 as illegal and contrary to law and against Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and in consequence thereof direct the Respondents to pay salary to the Petitioner herein by approving the post in grant-in-aid from the date of recommendation made by the 3rd Respondent to the 2nd Respondent with all consequential benefits by issuing Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ and pass...".
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner was initially appointed as SGT in the 4th respondent school on 07.10.2003. The petitioner has been working from 2003 and is 2 SN, J WP_7442_2023 eligible to be appointed as SGT in the 4th respondent School in grant-in-aid category but the same is not being considered by respondent No.2, consequently the petitioner had been deprived of equal pay on par with other SGTs, who are working in the regular schools. Owing to inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in not admitting and absorbing the post of the petitioner in grant-in-aid, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.
PERUSED THE RECORD.
4. The relevant portion of the Proceedings Lr.No. 684/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013 of the respondent No.3 addressed to the respondent No.2 is extracted hereunder:
"The Management of the school has filed Writ Petition in the Hon'ble Court vide W.P. No. 18144 of 2013 to settle the long pending issue of sanctioning of Grant-In-Aid for all eligible posts with immediate effect.
The following teachers were approved by the competent authority.
Name of the Teacher Cadre Date of
Sl. appointment
No.
1. Mrs. K. Kanya Kumari HPT-II 07-10-2003
2. Mr. K. Srikanth TPT-II 07.10.2003
3. Smt. G. Sucharita SGT 07.10.2003
4. P. Raja Narsu SGT 03.11.2003
5. P. Madhusudan Rao SGT 17.11.2003
3
SN, J
WP_7442_2023
The above approved appointments are made prior to the ban dated i.e. 20.10.2004 are eligible for admission into Grant-In-Aid, which is supported by the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment dated 6.9.2011 in SLP No.9541/2007".
Further, I submit that as per the interim orders in W.P.M.P. No. 12425/2002 in W.P. No. 10123/2003, this office was submitted the proposals for approval of appointments in unaided into aided posts vide under reference 1st cited for the above 5 posts.
In view of the above, I am submitting herewith the proposals for unaided to aided posts submitted by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Amberpet Mandal for further course of action".
5. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner's name is mentioned at Serial Number 3 in the approval list recommended by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 vide Lr.No.6840/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013 and it is specifically stated in the said approval list recommended by respondent No.3 to the respondent No.2 that appointment of petitioner along with four others had been made prior to ban dated 20.10.2004 and therefore, the petitioner is eligible for admission into Grant-In- Aid, which is supported by the Supreme Court judgment dated 06.09.2011 in SLP No. 9541/2007.
4
SN, J WP_7442_2023
6. A bare perusal of the proceedings dated 27.07.2013 (referred to and extracted above), further clearly indicates that as per the interim orders in W.P.M.P. No. 12425/2002 in W.P. No. 10123/2003 proposal's had been submitted by the respondent No.3 to the respondent No.2 for approval of appointments in unaided into aided posts in respect of five posts which includes the post of the petitioner in the category of SGT from the date of appointment 07.10.2003 vide this office Lr.Rc.No.4065/C7/2005, dated 18.12.2003.
7. Counter affidavit had been filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 and at para No.9 it is clearly admitted that there had been a recommendation in favour of the petitioner vide Proceedings dated 27.07.2013 of the 3rd respondent addressed to the 2nd respondent herein and the said issue is being dealt separately by the department in accordance to law. The relevant para Nos.5, 6 and 9 of the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder:
"5. It is submitted that the Sri Sai Vignana Vardhini Vidhyalayam Upper Primary School (English Medium) submitted proposals for admission of post into Grant in aid during 2003. The Government have convened High Level Committee and as per the recommendations of the High Level Committee have sanctioned Grant in aid posts to the eligible (30) schools in G.O.Ms.No. 143, 5 SN, J WP_7442_2023 Edn. (PS.2) Dept., dated 16.12.2003. Out of the said (30) schools, (1) post of School Assistant was sanctioned to the Sri Sai Vignana Vardhini Vidhyalam Upper Primary School (English Medium) and the same has been implemented and one teacher approved in the aided post is working.
6. It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed as unaided by the management as Secondary Grade Teacher and there is no sanctioned aided post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the said school. It is already held by the Hon'ble Courts, the appointments made and the individuals continued to be considered only if they are appointed against a sanctioned post.
In the instant case, there is no sanctioned aided post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the said school".
"9. It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted with regard to the proposal for admission into Grant-in- aid of Sri Sai Vignana Vardhini Vidhyalayam Upper Primary School (English Medium) by the 3rd respondent vide Lr.No. 6840/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013. The said issue is being dealt separately by the department in accordance with law".
8. Taking into consideration :
(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, 6 SN, J WP_7442_2023
(b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4,
(c) The averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 in particular para Nos.5, 6 and 9 (referred to and extracted above),
(d) The contents of the recommendation made in favour of the petitioner by the respondent No.3 to the respondent No.2 vide Lr.No.6840/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013,
(e) The fact that the office of the District Educational Officer, Hyderabad had submitted proposals for approval of appointments in unaided into aided posts for the post of SGT category, who had been appointed on 07.10.2003 vide letter of the office of the District Educational Officer, Hyderabad Lr.Rc.No.4065/C7/2005, dated 18.12.2003, The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein to consider the case of the petitioner for admission into Grant-In-Aid post as per the recommendation made by the 3rd respondent to the 7 SN, J WP_7442_2023 respondent No.2 vide Lr.No.6840/E4/2013, dated 27.07.2013 (referred to and extracted above), and as per the proposal submitted by the office of the District Educational Officer, Hyderabad District for approval of petitioner's post in the category of SGT into Grant-In-Aid, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and pass appropriate orders duly considering the case of the petitioner for admission and absorption in grant-in-aid post and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________ MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA Date: 17.03.2025 Skj