HC relief for tribal school teachers; calls for humane solution

The court noted that the state tribal welfare department runs ashram schools “to provide essential education to tribal children in the remote, hilly and geographically challenging terrains”

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Thursday quashed orders of the additional commissioner of tribal development, Thane, denying regularisation of service to six teachers who served in tribal ashram schools in Shahpur, after serving for a decade or more in a region where other qualified teachers were unwilling to serve.

HC relief for tribal school teachers; calls for humane solution

The court noted that the state tribal welfare department runs ashram schools “to provide essential education to tribal children in the remote, hilly and geographically challenging terrains”. Its order mentioned that “due to lack of basic civic facilities in these small villages, qualified staff are not willing to serve, leading to a critical vacancy crisis, where schools are often on the verge of closure”.

It was under these circumstances, the court noted, that the state government, instead of issuing public advertisements, appointed the petitioners as secondary and primary school teachers on daily wages, clock-hour, or honorarium basis as they had the the requisite qualifications, “so that tribal students would not be deprived of their fundamental right to education”.

Observing that the state government is expected to act as a “model litigant”, a division bench of Justices GS Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe said in their order, “Wherein it has been categorically held that where the petitioners have been working continuously for ten years on a meagre honorarium, asking the petitioners to continue to work on such honorarium for such a long period would certainly amount to their exploitation.”

The petitioners had contended that the orders of January 13 and 14 passed by the additional commissioner of tribal development, denying the regularisation of service and corresponding financial benefits to the six petitioners, had disregarded previous high court rulings. Their lawyer argued that while 2,000 similarly placed teachers were regularised, the petitioners were denied the same benefits. She said the state government “should not indulge in exploitative tactics against teachers who are vulnerable and are teaching in remote and tribal areas for the benefit of tribal students”.

The judges observed, “Where appointments are not illegal but possibly irregular, and where employees had served continuously against the backdrop of sanctioned functions for a considerable period, the need for a fair and humane resolution becomes paramount.”

The petitioners, who were appointed to serve in tribal primary and secondary schools in Shahpur, told the court that despite their continuous service of 10 to 13 years, the state government had issued fresh appointment orders for every academic year, creating “exploitative breaks in service”.

They had relied on a 2018 judgement of the court – Madhukar Bhavanrao Sadgir and Others vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others – in which the court had directed the regularisation of teaching and non-teaching staff and clarified that ten years of service is the benchmark and the sole criterion for regularisation.

The state government pleader had asked the court to dismiss the petitions arguing that the petitioners worked on a clock-hour basis and that they had not disclosed their actual working hours or mode of selection. The court was, however, not convinced.