Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sunil Kumar vs The State Of Rajasthan on 16 March, 2022
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17945/2021
Mahesh Swami S/o Shri Adu Ram, Aged About 28 Years,
Resident Of Thakurji Ka Mandirg, Village Ewad, Tehsil Jayal,
District Nagore, Presently Posted At Government Upper Primary
School Undarthal, Block Desuri, District Pali (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The Election Officer (Collector), District Pali.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Bali-120, District Pali.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 488/2022
Ramesh Kumar S/o Sohan Ram, Aged About 30 Years, Ward No.
6, Village Dhani Panchera, Dhani Panchera, Churu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral Officer,
State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Chittorgarh.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Badi Sadri, Dist. Chittorgarh.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 495/2022
Anil Kumar S/o Krishan Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No.
8, Post Mokamwala, 6Ksd, Anoopgarh, Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral Officer,
State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
(Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM)
(2 of 9) [CW-17945/2021]
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Sriganganagar.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Raisinghnagar, Dist. Sriganganagar.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 506/2022
Jaipal S/o Veeru Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Vpo Delwan, 4-
D-D, Padampur, Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Sriganganagar.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Karanpur, Dist. Sriganganagar.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1073/2022
Balram Meena S/o Jailal Meena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Aethai
Mohalla, Manderu, Dist. Karoli.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Bikaner.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Kolayat, Dist. Bikaner.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1075/2022
Sunil Kumar S/o Bhag Chand Jain, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Jain
Mohalla, Aliyari, Tonk, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
(Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM)
(3 of 9) [CW-17945/2021]
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Jaisalmer.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Jaisalmer, Dist. Jaisalmer.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2632/2022
Ravikant S/o Balveer Singh, Aged About 37 Years, Dhanka Basti,
Ward No.9, Sangariya, Hanumangarh. At Present Posted As
Teacher Grade Iii At Govt. Upper Primary School 3Mjd,
Ratanpura, Sangariya, Hanumangarh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Hanumangarh.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Sangariya, Dist. Hanumangarh.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2636/2022
Sukh Ram S/o Het Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Near
Dharamshala, Rasuwala, 7Idg, Rasuwala, Hanumangarh. At
Present Posted As Teacher Grade Iii At Govt. Upper Primary
School, 3Mjd, Ratanpura, Sangariya, Hanumangarh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Hanumangarh.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Sangariya, Dist. Hanumangarh.
(Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM)
(4 of 9) [CW-17945/2021]
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3644/2022
Gorakha Ram S/o Nanak Ram, Aged About 26 Years, Ward No. 1,
Jagevwala, Bamanwali, Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral Officer,
State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Bikaner.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Kolayat, Dist. Bikaner.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3567/2022
1. Sharif Khan S/o Banne Khan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Ghanghu, Churu.
2. Pradeep Kumar S/o Sagarmal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Dhani Joshiya Wali, Post Nangal Bhim, Srimadhopur,
Sikar.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Electoral
Officer, State Election Commission, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Election Officer Cum Collector, District
Barmer.
4. The Electoral Registration Officer Cum Sub Division
Magistrate (Sdm), Chohtan, Dist. Barmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Ojha.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Utkarsh Singh for Mr. Sunil
Beniwal, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
(Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM)
(5 of 9) [CW-17945/2021]
Order
16/03/2022
These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking a directions to the respondents not to deploy teachers as Booth Level Officer ('BLO') in view of the provisions of the Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ('the Act').
In the writ petitions, the petitioners relying on the circulars issued by the education department dated 18.10.2011 and 01.06.2012, sought a specific direction that as the education department itself has mandated that teachers could not be deployed for the said work, the respondents be directed not to deploy teachers like petitioners as BLO.
Notices of the petitions were issued to the respondents and learned AAG was directed to complete his instructions in the matter from both the education department and the election department, in view of the apparent contradictions in teachers being made to work as BLO and the instructions issued by the education department.
A response has been filed by the respondents, inter-alia, indicating that after the circulars relied on by the petitioners issued in the year 2011 & 2012, a communication by the Secretary of the Department to the Director, Primary Education has been issued on 27.08.2015 specifically indicating that the teachers can be deployed as BLOs and therefore, as the earlier communications stand superseded by the communication dated 27.08.2015, the reliance placed by the petitioners is misplaced.
Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that the Manual on Electoral Rolls issued by the Election Commission of India provides 13 categories of Government / Semi-government (Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM) (6 of 9) [CW-17945/2021] employees, who can be deployed as BLO and the same further provides that teachers shall be drafted minimally as BLO and therefore, the respondents are not justified in deploying teachers as BLOs and that the BLO should be a local person only.
Further submissions have been made that even in cases where there are obvious difficulties in teachers working as BLOs, inasmuch as, in some cases where the school has only three teachers and all the three teachers have been deployed as BLOs, which results in difficulties to the teachers as well as the students and therefore, the said action of the respondents is not justified.
Submissions have also been made that deployment is contrary to the provisions of Section 27 of the Act and on that count also, the action of the respondents in deploying the teachers as BLOs, deserves to be mandatorily stopped.
Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that in view of the circular dated 27.08.2015 (Annex.-R/1), the plea sought to be raised based on the circulars of the year 2011 & 2012 has now no basis.
Further submissions have been made that in so far as the Manual on Electoral Rolls is concerned, the same only indicates that to the extent possible, the BLO should be an elector in the polling station where he is deputed as BLO, which cannot be read as a mandatory condition.
Further submissions have been made that only in cases where the teachers are required to be deputed as BLOs, they are being deployed and that the provisions of Section 27 of the Act, in fact, provides that teachers can be deputed for election work and as such, the submissions made in this regard also have no basis. (Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM)
(7 of 9) [CW-17945/2021] I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.
The petitions principally have been filed relying on the circulars of the year 2011 & 2012. The circular issued on 27.08.2015 (Annex.-R/1) reads as under :-
"funs'kd] izkjfEHkd f'k{kk] jktLFkku] chdkusjA fo"k; %& f'k{kdksa dh xSj&'kS{kf.kd dk;ksZa esa izfrfu;qfDr ds laca/k esaA lanHkZ %& vkidk i= Øekad% f'kfojk@izkja@f'k{kd&laLFkk@,Q-2@iz-
fu- funsZ'k@2015 fnukad 27-07-2015 egksn;] mi;qZDr fo"k;kUrxZr ,oa lanfHkZr i= }kjk f'k{kdksa ds xSj&'kS{kf.kd dk;Z fo'ks"kdj fuokZpu laca/kh dk;ksZ esa fu;kstu ds laca/k esa pkgs x;s ekxZn'kZu ds Øe esa ys[k gS fd f'k{kdksa dks fuEukafdr pquko laaca/kh dÙkZO;ksa ds fuogZu gsrq yxk;s tkus dk izko/kku gS & 1- ¼v½ ch-,y-vks- ds :i esa ¼c½ i;Zos{kd ds :i esa ¼l½ vke pquko@mi pqukoksa esa lsDVj@tksuy eftLVªsV] ihBklhu vf/kdkjh@ernku vf/kdkjh ds :i esaA ¼n½ vU; dk;Z ;Fkk& Flying Squad/SST/UST/VUT/Control Room etc. 2- lkekU; o"kksZa ¼pquko o"kZ ds vfrfjDr½ esa ernkrk lwph dk iqujh{k.k dk;Z gksrk gS] tks lekU;r;k flrEcj ls uoEcj rd gksrk gSA blds vfrfjDr Hkkjr fuokZpu vk;ksx ls vU; vfHk;ku ;Fkk ,ubZvkjih,ih vkfn ds fy, funsZ'k vkrs gSa] rks f'k{kdksa dks yxk;k tkrk gS vU;Fkk ughaA buds }kjk 'kS{kf.kd le; ls iwoZ ;k blds i'pkr~ vFkok vodk'k ds fnuksa esa gh mDr dk;Z fd;k tkrk gSA 3- vke pquko@mi pqukoksa ds nkSjku fofHkUu dk;ksZa ds fy, f'k{kdksa dh lsok,sa yh tkrh gSa vkSj jgsaxhA Hkonh;] lgh@& ¼dqath yky eh.kk½ 'kklu lfpo"
The above circular clarifies each and every aspect regarding the engagement of teachers as BLOs and for all other non- teaching work and therefore, the plea sought to be raised in this regard based on previous circulars essentially has now no basis.
So far as the indications made in the Manual on Electoral Rolls is concerned, the list of as many as 13 Government / Semi- government employees have been indicated, who could be (Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM) (8 of 9) [CW-17945/2021] deployed as BLOs. The petitioners have failed to place on record material to indicate as to what percentage of teachers have been deployed / deputed as BLOs compared to other employes and as such, it cannot be said that the requirement in the Manual of drafting the teachers minimally has not been followed by the respondents.
Further so far as, deputing an elector of the polling station as BLO is concerned, the manual indicates 'to the extent possible' and therefore, the petitioners cannot seek enforcement of the said condition so as to get relieved from the duties as BLOs.
The provisions of Section 27 of the Act read as under :-
"27. Prohibition of deployment of teachers for non- educational purposes.- No teacher shall be deployed for any non-educational purposes other than the decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament, as the case may be."
A bare reading of the above reveals that the section, which deals with prohibition of deployment of teachers for non- educational purposes, by way of exception provides that the teachers can, inter-alia, be deployed for duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislature or Parliament, as the case may be and it cannot be said that the work of BLO would not fall within the said category.
In view thereof, the various plea sought to be raised in the petitions seeking mandate to the respondents not to deploy teachers as BLOs has no substance.
However, insofar as, the personal difficulties to a teacher in a given case are concerned, it is always open for them to approach the concerned authority in this regard and it is expected of the (Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM) (9 of 9) [CW-17945/2021] concerned authority to look into the grievance raised and in case, found justified to redress the same appropriately.
With the above observations, no case for interference is made out in the present writ petitions. The writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J 17 to 25 & 42-Rmathur/-
(Downloaded on 16/03/2022 at 09:03:18 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)