1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Kamalben vs President

High Court Of Gujarat|20 June, 2012
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 27.03.2012 passed by the Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal [for short "the Tribunal] in Application No. 19 of 2012, whereby the said application was rejected.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is serving in the school run and managed by Shri Amreli Kelevani Mandal and respondent no. 2 herein is the Principal of the said school. It is the case of the petitioner that the State Government, Education Department by its Resolution dated 31.12.1976 declared Standard 8 to 12 to be considered as one unit in the Secondary and Higher Secondary section. Again on 27.04.2011, the State Government passed another Resolution stating that as the Right to Education Act, 2009 had come into force, Standard 8 will be now considered in the primary education and Standard 9 to 12 will be considered as one unit in the Secondary and Higher Secondary Section. It is further the case of the petitioner that the school management vide its Resolution dated 30.04.2011 and 28.11.2011 absorbed two surplus junior teachers in the Higher Secondary Section. Being aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner vide letter dated 25.07.2011 requested respondent no. 2 to absorb her in the Higher Secondary Section and to follow the D.E.O. Resolution No. 144 for alloting period in the Higher Secondary Section. Thereafter, the petitioner made several correspondence to the respondents to consider her case for allotment of the periods in Higher Secondary Section. However, respondent no. 2 for the first time vide letter dated 08.12.2011 replied to the petitioner that the proposal of the petitioner would be taken into consideration later on. Being aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner preferred Application 19 of 2012 before the Tribunal, which came to be rejected vide order dated 27.03.2012. Hence, this petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The main grievance of the petitioner is that teachers junior to her were promoted to the Higher Secondary Section. From the record it transpires that the post of Higher Secondary Teacher is not a promotional post for a Secondary Teacher. Therefore, it cannot be said that the right of promotional of the petitioner has been taken away. However, the Secondary and Higher Secondary teachers are appointed separately and there is no provision whereby a Secondary Teacher can be promoted as Higher Secondary Teacher. Apart from that the two surplus teachers who were absorbed in the higher secondary section was a stop-gap arrangement and they were not given higher salary. Considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal has not committed any illegality or impropriety while rejecting the application. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by the Tribunal in its impugned order and hence, find no reasons to entertain this petition. It is however, observed, that it will be open for the petitioner to approach the Tribunal to reconsider the document dated 16.09.2011.
4. Consequently, the petition is dismissed summarily.
JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/ Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Kamalben vs President


High Court Of Gujarat

20 June, 2012