Telangana High Court
J.Venkateshwara Rao vs Government Of Ap.,Rep.By Its Principal ... on 20 December, 2018
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
WP.Nos.7789, 9545, 19630, 22155, 37999, 18563, 21920, 22303 &
39531 of 2012; and 23288, 24252 and 25317 of 2013
COMMON ORDER :
Since common issue arises in all these Writ Petitions, they are being disposed of by this Common Order.
2. Heard the counsel for petitioners in all the Writ Petitions, and the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education, for respondents.
3. In all these Writ Petitions the petitioners are working as un- aided posts of lecturers in private managements and seek absorption in available vacancies of aided posts in the said private managements. They seek setting aside orders of rejection passed in respect of some of the petitioners by the Directorate of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh; and to absorb them in grant-in-aid posts.
4. It is not in dispute that in some of the above Writ Petitions proposals were sent by the private managements where the petitioners are working in un-aided posts for consideration of the cases of such petitioners for absorption into existing vacant aided posts, and in other cases there are no such proposals, but however, the lecturers working in unaided posts have filed the Writ Petition seeking direction to the respondents to absorb them in the aided vacant posts of Lecturers in the subjects which they are teaching in the private managements.
MSR,J
::2:: wp_7789_2012&batch
5. Though the matters have been pending in this Court for the last six years, it is shocking to note that no counter-affidavit has been filed by the learned Government Pleader for Education appearing for the official respondents in any of these cases. So it is deemed that the official respondents have no response to file.
6. The counsel for petitioners contended that petitioners have been selected by duly constituted selection committees in the unaided lecturer posts where they are employed by the respective private managements; that there was a ban imposed making fresh recruitment vide G.O.Ms.No.35 dt.27.03.2006; that in several institutions the State Government had permitted absorption of unaided posts of Lecturers in vacant aided posts and the petitioners herein are being discriminated.
7. The counsel for petitioners contends that petitioners possess the qualifications prescribed in GO.Ms.No.12 Education (C.E.I-2) Department dt.10.01.1992 and are eligible for absorption in the vacant aided posts of Lecturers in the private institutions. They have also cited several proceedings including proceedings No.365/Admn.VI- 2/2000, dt.23.06.2000 of the Commissioner and Director of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad; proceedings Rc.No.1576/Admn.VI-2/2000, dt.08.08.2000; proceedings Rc.No.1903/Admn.VI-2/2000, dt.23.12.2000; proceedings Rc.No.2190/Admn.VI-2/2000, dt.29.12.2000 of the Commissioner and Director of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh absorbing in grant-in-aid posts lecturers working in the unaided posts like the MSR,J ::3:: wp_7789_2012&batch petitioners in the private managements. They have also cited G.O.Rt.No.525 Higher Education (CE.II.2) Department dt.17.07.2001 of the Government of Andhra Pradesh; G.O.Rt.No.160 Higher Education (CE.II.2) Department dt.16.02.2001, proceedings Rc.No.1093/Admn.III-1/2001 dt.24.08.2001, etc., wherein several unaided lecturers working in private colleges were absorbed by the State Government.
8. They have also placed reliance on the order dt.26.02.2010 passed in WP.No.9441 of 2005 wherein this Court considered the plea of petitioner therein seeking absorption in aided post when her plea was rejected. In the said Writ Petition relief was granted to petitioner therein and the respondents were directed to re-consider the case of petitioner for regularization of her services and for her absorption in the aided post of Junior Lecturer in Mathematics in private management on par with another individual who had been given the said benefit. The said order was confirmed on 15.02.2012 in Writ Appeal No.851 of 2010 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)/2012/CC.19308/2012 dt.27.09.2013. After the said SLP was dismissed, G.O.Ms.No.16 Higher Education (I.E.II) Department dt.12.03.2013 was issued granting admission into grant in aid to the petitioners in these cases.
9. In another W.P.No.5189 of 2006 also proceedings rejecting request of the management of a private degree college to admit the petitioner therein to grant in aid post of Librarian were challenged.
MSR,J
::4:: wp_7789_2012&batch
The Writ Petition was allowed on 24.12.2010, and thereafter, G.O.Rt.No.776 Higher Education (CE.II) Department dt.21.10.2011 was issued admitting the said petitioner to grant in aid.
10. WP.No.14482 of 2006 was filed by another unaided Junior Lecturer in a private management challenging proceedings rejecting absorption of the petitioner therein in the available aided posts. The said Writ Petition was allowed on 14.02.2011 by setting aside the order of rejection and a direction was given to absorb the petitioner against any one of the aided vacancies of Junior Lecturer in the subject he was teaching in the private management.
11. The State challenged it in Writ Appeal No.1047 of 2012 which was dismissed on 05.09.2012 and the said order was also got confirmed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.38336 of 2012. Thereafter, G.O.Ms.No.15 Higher Education (I.E.) Department dt.07.03.2013 was issued absorbing the petitioner in that Writ Petition into grant in aid post.
12. Similar orders have been passed on 22.08.2013 in WP.No.25853 of 2008, order dt.11.04.2012 passed in WP.No.2364 of 2006; order dt.13.10.2013 passed in WP.No.20036 of 2003; order dt.12.04.2012 passed in WP.No.4105 and 4107 of 2002 which was also withdrawn by order dt.26.07.2013 in W.A.No.1470 of 2012 and batch.
13. Recently, a learned Single Judge of this Court also passed orders on 20.11.2018 in WP.No.19380 of 2010.
MSR,J
::5:: wp_7789_2012&batch
14. In all these cases, the sole objection taken by the respondents is that there was a ban on recruitment imposed vide G.O.Ms.No.35 dt.27.03.2006 and therefore the question of considering the cases of the unaided lecturers in private managements for absorbing them into aided services would not arise.
15. These contentions were repelled by the Court.
16. Though the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education sought to contend that there might be some doubt about the petitioners working in the unaided posts in private managements, in the instant cases, since no counter-affidavit is filed raising any doubt about the working of the respective petitioners in the unaided posts, the pleading in the Writ Petitions has to be accepted.
17. The learned Government Pleader also sought to place reliance on order dt.08.02.2002 in WP.No.27145 of 1996 which dealt with making of 'appointments' in aided vacancies.
18. The said decision has no application in the present case since the present cases do not deal with 'appointment' in aided vacancies but are cases of 'absorption' in aided vacancies.
19. As stated above, in some of the proposals submitted by the Management to the Commissioner of Collegiate Education and in other cases, the private management had furnished details on the directions of the Controller of Collegiate Education about the existing workload and other details.
MSR,J
::6:: wp_7789_2012&batch
20. As rightly contended by the counsel for petitioners, when the State itself had absorbed similarly situated persons like the Writ Petitioners into grant in aid posts on its own and also pursuant to orders passed by this Court, it cannot be contended that petitioners have to be treated on a different footing and they should be denied consideration for absorption in the grant in aid vacancies in the respective subjects existing in the private managements where the respective petitioners are working.
21. Therefore, all these Writ Petitions are allowed. The orders rejecting absorption in aided posts passed by the Commissioner and Directorate of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh in the case of the petitioners are set aside; and the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Commissioner of Collegiate Education are directed to absorb the petitioners in the aided posts of Lecturers in the respective private Managements with all consequential benefits.
22. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are allowed as above. No order as to costs.
23. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in these Writ Petitions, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO Date: 20.12.2018 Ndr/*