Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Mohammad Kamil Mohammad Islam Ansari vs State Of Gujarat & 2....Opponent(S) on 9 October, 2014

Author: Vijay Manohar Sahai

Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai, R.P.Dholaria

         C/WPPIL/209/2013                                             ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                   WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 209 of 2013

================================================================
      MOHAMMAD KAMIL MOHAMMAD ISLAM ANSARI....Applicant(s)
                          Versus
             STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SUBRAMANIAM IYER, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR UTKARSH SHARMA, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MR NIRAV BHATT for MR HL PATEL ADVOCATES for Opponent(s) No. 3
================================================================

         CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
                VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
                and
                HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

                                 Date : 09/10/2014


                                  ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI)

1. The matter has been taken up in the revised board. No one appears for the petitioner.

2. By way of this Writ Petition in the nature of public interest litigation, the petitioner has claimed the following reliefs:

"(A) That Your Lordships will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, or order directing the respondents to recruit and appoint sufficient number of teachers as required by the scheduled under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act in all the primary schools without any further delay.
(B) Such other and further reliefs that is just, fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case may be granted."

3. We have heard Mr.Utkarsh Sharma, learned AGP for Page 1 of 3 C/WPPIL/209/2013 ORDER respondent No.1 and Mr.Nirav Bhatt for Mr.H.L.Patel, learned advocates for respondent No.3.

4. Respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit-in-reply, wherein it has been stated that sufficient number of teachers have been appointed and the schools are functioning, however, due to non- availability of eligible candidates, some posts are lying vacant. Respondent No.3-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has already filed affidavit, wherein it has been stated that the State has already sanctioned 28 posts of teacher in the month of September 2012 and in response to the advertisement issued only four persons were considered eligible for the post of teacher in upper primary. It is stated that out of the above stated 28 posts, only 4 posts could be filled up and other 24 posts remained vacant due to non-availability of eligible candidates inspite of the fact that notices/advertisement was made for the same.

5. So far as other districts are concerned, no details have been given by the respondents as to which districts are facing the shortage of teachers, though post has been sanctioned by the State Government and the teachers are to be appointed by the Municipal Corporation in the respective schools. It is necessary that the vacant seats of teachers in primary schools be filled up as per the prevalent policy at the earliest.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition (PIL) stands finally disposed of. Notice is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs.



                                                    (V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.)




                                Page 2 of 3
                   C/WPPIL/209/2013                     ORDER



                                                   (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.)
Ashish Tripathi




                                     Page 3 of 3