The recent ruling of the High Court, seeking to protect the interests of aided schools and teachers, would put additional financial strain on the government. In addition to putting a tight leash on the government with regard to appointments, the ruling would also allow more appointments.
The court said that the government has to ensure the minimum teacher-student ratio as prescribed by central government norms and lack of finances should not hamper it. The court also said that the central government was also responsible in sharing the financial burden.
The court reviewed orders of the government dated May 3, 2013; July 4, 2014; August 11, 2014 and August 6, 2015. A circular dated August 26, 2014 was also reviewed. The findings of the court corroborate many appointments already completed by school managements. In addition to many schools, teachers too had submitted complaints about the government’s appointment norms.
In its preface to the ruling, the court said education deserves a lot of seriousness and added that the government had decided to incur the expenditure of education on its own. The court said that it is doubtful whether teachers are getting the pay they deserve as per their social standing. Further, their problems are exacerbated by many factors such as population, lack of funds, lack of basic infrastructure etc. In spite of all these, existing rules, norms, centralised education and aided schools have all helped to make the state the leading state in terms of literacy.
The ruling would allow managements to hire teachers in the ratio of one per 30 LP students and 35 UP students. Cost of education would be shared by the Centre. Many school managements had questioned the norm that required prior approval for appointment of teachers. The court observed that such restrictions would not augur well for educational motives and added that it would not be proper to wait for the government if there are requirements at schools. The court said that the need of the hour is to focus on education and not on the costs involved in education.
School managements also argued that the appraisal system to assess teachers infringed on their rights. The court observed that there is no infringement because the appraisal committee is only advisory in nature. The court however observed lack of clarity in the processes involved in creating the committee. Since there is no clarity on the appointment of the chair and other members, it could lead to unilateral decisions, the court said. The observations came as a relief to managements.
Disclaimer
The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Manorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.