THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 11932 of 2000 Dated: 28.7.2010 Between: Smt. Akkala Kamala Kumari ..... PETITIONER AND 1. Government of A.P., rep., by Principal Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 11932 of 2000 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of the 1st respondent issued in their Memo.Nos.40522/PS.2/98-3, Education, dated 23.8.1999 and Memo.No.40522/PS(2)/98-4, dated 26.2.2000 are illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct respondents 1 and 2 to accept the proposal of the D.E.O., Guntur in his letter No.4345/C4/96, dated 1.7.1997 recommending to admit the post of Grade II Hindi Pandit at SSEC Upper Primacy School, Gandhinagar, Tenali into Grant-in-aid and pass such other orders. The case of the petitioner reads as follows: Sri Sastri Education Committee, Gandhinagar, Tenali originally started an elementary school during the year 1969 and later upgraded the school into Upper Primary School by the year 1982 and it was recognized by the Government for all the seven classes and on upgradation of the school, the management filled up the post of Hindi Pandit Grade II by appointing one H. Girija Devi, a qualified Hindi Pandit w.e.f. 18.11.1982, which was approved by the District Educational Officer, Guntur and continued till the Hindi subject teaching in Upper Primary School was dispensed with by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.525, Education, dated 3.12.1985 read with M.No.46450/TE/85-2, Education, dated 20.3.1986, as a consequence of which, the services of the said Girija Devi were terminated. Since the said post is disbanded, the Government issued orders under G.O.Ms.No.188, Education, dated 30.7.1987 admitting all other posts except this post to grant-in-aid. The Government resumed teaching of Hindi in class VI and VII by their G.O.Ms.No.152, Education, dated 13.6.1990. On that, the petitioner was appointed as Hindi Pandit Grade II temporarily in an unaided post and subsequently, she was terminated from 31.1.1995 and reappointed to the same post from 1.2.1995 after her selection by the staff selection committee and the 3rd respondent approved her appointment with effect from 1.2.1995 by his proceedings dated 28.4.1995. Thus, she has been working in the school as Hindi Pandit Grade II in an unaided post w.e.f. 12.9.1990 to 31.1.1995 on temporary basis and from 1.2.1995 till date on regular basis in an unaided post without regular pay. The 4th respondent submitted proposals for admitting this post into grant-in-aid to the 3rd respondent, who in turn submitted the same to the 2nd respondent recommending to admit the post of Grade II Hindi Pandit at SSEC Upper Primary School, Gandhinagar, Tenali vide letter dated 1.7.1997. As no orders had been passed, the petitioner filed WP No.26420 of 1998 and this Court by an order dated 23.9.1998 directed the 2nd respondent to consider the proposals dated 1.7.1997. Pursuant thereto, the 2nd respondent informed that the said proposal will be placed before the High Level Committee for consideration. On that, the petitioner filed Contempt petition No.836 of 1999, in which, a counter was filed with a copy of Government Order issued in Memo No.40552/P.S.2/98-3, Education, dated 23.8.1998 rejecting the post of Grade II Hindi Pandit at SSEC School, for admission into Grand-in-aid on the ground that the post was not in existence as on 1.4.1977 to 1.9.1985. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents. Perused the material available on record. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Section 3(1)(a) of the A.P. Private Educational Institutions Grant-in-Aid (Regulation) Act, 1988, it is mandatory that the matter has to be referred to the High Level Committee, but it was not done in the instant case and therefore, the proceedings impugned herein are liable to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General opposed the said contention. It is stated by the respondents in the counter filed by them that the grant-in-aid cannot be sanctioned to the said Grade II Hindu Pandit post on the ground that the said post is not in existence as on 1.4.1977 to 1.9.1988 and further as per the provisions of sections 45 and 46 of the act 1/1982, the grant cannot be claimed by the Educational Institutions as a right and that the Government is competent to take a decision in a matter of this nature. The provisions of section 3(1)(a) of the Act say that no private educational institution other than a college established after 1st April, 1977 and existing on the 1st September, 1985 and no private college established after the 1st April, 1977 and existing on the 1st March, 1985 shall be entitled to receive any grant-in-aid unless the Committee constituted in G.O.Rt.No.220, Education (SSE-I) Department, dated 24.2.1988 recommends that it may be admitted to grant-in-aid. The fact remains undisputed is that the school in question was instituted in the year 1969 and admitted to grant in aid. The dispute is with regard to the post of Grade II Hindi Pandit to be admitted to grant in aid. However, the fact remains that the institution in question comes within the ambit of the provisions of section 3 (1) (a) of the Act and the said institution was admitted to grant in aid. If that being the case, under the provisions of section 3 (1) (a) of the Act, which is a mandatory one, the matter has to be referred to the Committee constituted under G.O.Rt.No:220, Education (SSE-I) Department dated 24.2.1988 so as to receive any grant in aid. Now, coming to the facts of the case on hand, there is no dispute as to the existence of the school as contemplated under the provisions of section 3 (1) (a) of the Act and apart from that, there is also no dispute that the petitioner is working as Grade II Hindi Pandit and she was initially appointed on 12.9.1990 on temporary basis and later, she was selected by the Staff Selection Committee and the 3rd respondent approved her appointment w.e.f. 1.2.1995. It is also not in dispute that the proposals submitted by the 3rd respondent were rejected under the impugned proceedings without referring the matter to the Committee in question. In this background of the matter, it can be inferred that the action of the authorities amounts to non- compliance of the provisions of section 3(1) (a) of the Act, which is a mandatory one. In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation to hold that the order impugned herein suffers from illegality and irregularity and thereby, the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed setting aside the orders impugned while remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent for the purpose of referring the subject matter to the high level committee to pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to the costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ________________________ Justice B. Chandra Kumar Date: 28th July, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 11932 of 2000 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 28/07/2010