HC raps Haryana for not appointing regular faculty
The 4,073 guest teachers of Haryana failed to get relief from the high court on Thursday as the division bench of justice Surya Kant and justice PB Bajanthri dismissed the petition filed by them.punjab Updated: May 29, 2015 10:59 IST
The 4,073 guest teachers of Haryana failed to get relief from the High Court on Thursday as the division bench of justice Surya Kant and justice PB Bajanthri dismissed the petition filed by them. The high court also castigated the government for changing its stand on the issue and observed that government was “colluding” with these teachers in “defying the court orders”.
The government now has to submit a compliance report on Friday before a single-judge bench, wherein the case is listed for hearing. The report is to be filed on high court order of May 11, wherein it was given two weeks’ time to dispense with the services of these surplus teachers. On May 22, the government had issued showcause notices to these teachers for termination of their services.
The court bench rapped the previous Bhupinder Singh Hooda-led Congress government as well as present Manohar Lal Khattar-led BJP government for delaying recruitment of regular teachers despite giving an assurance to Supreme court in 2012.
“Efforts are to delay and defy the orders. The court has become helpless giving directions to the state to comply with the orders of Supreme Court,” the HC bench said in open court hearing while referring to the undertaking given by the government before the Supreme Court whereby it had to appoint regular faculty in place of guest faculty teachers across the state.
Apart from these 4,073 teachers, who are surplus and treated as separate category, there are other 16,000 guest teachers working in state schools.
The petitioners had argued that they be allowed to continue till the time regular appointment is not made.
The court said there was no reason for such a delay and there appeared to be “wilful disobedience” of court orders by the state government. Three years have passed and no efforts have been made by the government to fill these posts and there appears delay due to “vote-bank politics or due to administrative reasons,” the high court observed.