B.Sudershan Reddy, J. - (1.) (Per the Hon'ble Mr. Justice ) The Appellant - Writ petitioner prays for an appropriate writ order direction directing the respondents to approve the absorption of the Appellant - petitioner.........into the Secondary Grade Teacher grant-in-aid post and also praYs for a consequential direction declaring the proceedings of the District Educational Officer, Mahaboobnagar, the 2nd respondent herein in Re. No. C3/1843/92 dated 19-8-1992 and 13-10-1992 in so far as they adversely affect the rights of the petitioner-appellant.
(2.) The facts leading to filing of the writ petition and writ appeal may be briefly summarised as follows: The petitioner was initially appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 30-6-90 in the 3rd respondent-school after following the required selection process and the rules in existence in the pay scale of Rs. 1010-1800/-. The post in which the petitioner was appointed at the relevant time was an unaided post By proceedings dated 28-3-1992, the 3rd respondent absorbed five teachers including the petitioner-appellant in the grant-in-aid posts with effect from 1-4-1992. The post were sanctioned by the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.Rt.No. 8, Education (SSE-2) Department dated 3-1-1992. It is categorically . stated in the said proceedings that all the five teachers including the appellant- petitioner are fully qualified and eligible to be admitted into grant-in-aid posts. The 3rd respondent after issuing the said proceedings, sent the same to the 2nd respondent for his approval. The 2nd respondent, by proceedings dt 19-8-92 approved the absorption of four unaided teachers only into grant-in-aid posts of Secondary Grade Teachers sanctioned by the Government in G.O.Rt.No. 8 dated 3-1-1992 with effect from 1-4-1992. The 2nd respondent herein, however, directed the 3rd respondent-school to absorb the 4th respondent herein who is also working in the same school in the unaided post into the grant-in-aid post of S.G. Teacher with effect from 1-4-1992 in place of the petitioner. The operative portion of the said communication reads as follows: "Further the correspondent is requested to absorb Sri N. Venkat Ramanaiah, B.A.B.Ed., who is working in the unaided postS.G.B.T., from 5-8-1989 into the Grant-in-aid post of S.G.B.T., with effect from 1-4-1992 in place of Sri N. Venkataiah absorbed in the 5th post as Sri S. Venkataramanaiah is senior to Sri T. Venkataiah and whose name is recommended by the D.H.E., Hyderabad to the Government and submit the proposals to this office immediately for necessary approval." It appears that immediately on 29-8-1992 itself, the 3rd respondent addressed the 2nd respondent herein bririging the true and correct facts to his notice. In the said report, it is specifically stated that the 4th respondent herein does not possess the teachers training certificate which is an essential basic qualifications prescribed for the appointment as Secondary Grade Basic Teachers as per the instructions contained in G.O.Ms.No. 40, Education, dated 7-2-1992. The 3rd respondent specifically referred to the instructions issued by the Director of School Education. The report also referred to the fact that the proposal for the absorption of teachers into the aided posts including that of the writ petitioner- appellant was sent to the 2nd respondent only after being duly attested by the Deputy Educational Officer, Nagarkurnool who was the Chairman of the District Level Committee and at the time of the inspection of the school by the District Level Committee, the 4th respondent herein did not submit his B.Ed. (Vocational Course) certificate for the purpose of aborption of the teachers into the aided posts. The school was inspected on 8-11-1990. In order to get grant-in- aid from the Government, the School Education committee has decided to consider the case of the petitioner herein along with me four other teachers who were fully qualified to hold the posts of S.G.B. Teachers after deciding that the 4th respondent herein was only an untrained graduate. However, the 2nd respondent herein by his proceedings dated 13-10-1992 while reiterating the earlier instructions dated 19-8-1992 for absorption of the 4th respondent into the grant-in-aid post of S.G.B.T. post, specifically directed the 3rd respondent school to submit 'proposals for approval'. The proposal of the 3rd respondent was negatived and strict instructions were given to absore the 4th respondent into the fifth grant-in-aid post. This order dated 13-10-1992 of the 2nd respondent is impugned in the writ petition.
(3.) The 2nd respondent filed counter-affidavit reiterating what is stated in the impugned order. It is stated, inter alia, that the 4th respondent is senior to that of the petitioner-appellant in all respects. However, the fact that the 4th respondent does not possess the minimum required qualifications of T.T.C.'. is not disputed. The 4th respondent also filed his counter-affidavit stating that he was appointed in the 3rd respondent-school on 5-8-1989 and whereas the petitioner was appointed in the same school on 30-6-1990 and therefore, he claims seniority over the petitioner. He complains that the action of the management is highly arbitrary in ignoring his claim and proposing the name of the petitioner-appellant for absorption into the fifth grant-in-aid post His entire claim is based upon the seniority. The 4th respondent also does not dispute that he does not possess the Teachers Training Certificate prescribed under G.O.Ms.No. 40, Education dated 7-2-1992 for being appointed as S.G.B. Teacher. Learned single Judge, after an elaborate consideration of the matter, dismissed the writ petition holding that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. Hence the writ appeal.;