| STATUS |  | DISPOSED |
|
| ||||||||||||
| Subject Category |
| LETTER PETITION & PIL MATTER - SLPs FILED AGAINST JUDGMENTS/ORDERS PASSED BY THE HIGH COURTS IN WRIT PETITIONS FILED AS PIL |
| Listing Details |
 | Date of Disposal | 26/03/2014 |
| Designed,Developed and Maintained by NIC Computer Cell,Supreme Court of India |
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 420 OF 2012 IN SLP(C) 10818/2012
TILAK RAJ Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
ARUN KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date: 26/03/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. John Mathew, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. D.S. Chauhan, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Singh, Adv.
Mr. Rajinder Juneja, Adv.
Mr. S.L. Bhayana, Sr. Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.
Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Adv.
Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Anubha Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Ambuj Agarwal, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The contempt petition is disposed of in terms
of the signed order.
(VINOD LAKHINA)
COURT MASTER
(INDU BALA KAPUR)
COURT MASTER
(SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE)IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.420 OF 2012
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 10818 OF 2012
TILAK RAJ ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
ARUN KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS
ORDER
We have heard learned counsel for the parties
at length.
Without mentioning the factual background in
detail, suffice it is to state that the State of
Haryana has appointed 'Guest Teachers' without
following regular recruitment procedure and these
teachers have been allowed to continue. Their
appointment and continuation became the subject
matter of certain proceedings which landed in this
Court as well.
In those matters, order dated 30th March, 2012
was passed with the following directions:
...2/-:2:
“7. Having heard the learned Attorney
General for India, Mr. Subramanium and
Mr. Vishwanathan, learned senior
advocates, for the parties and also
keeping in mind the submissions made by
Mr. Vishwanathan, that the intention of
the Division Bench of the High Court
was that no further appointments of
'Guest Teachers' should be made after
1st April, 2012, and that the vacancies
should be filled up by posting and
reposting teachers in the different
institutions, we feel that the two
things should really be kept separate,
notwithstanding the apprehension voiced
by Mr. Vishwanathan, that this could
lead to continuance of appointment of
'Guest Teachers'.
8. We make it very clear that as
directed by the Division Bench of the
High Court, no fresh appointments of
'Guest Teachers' will be made from 1st
April, 2012. However, since students
also cannot be made to suffer on
account of the delay in the appointment
of regular teachers, we direct that the
exercise indicated in the scheme, must
be completed within the time specified
in the scheme and no further extension
or deviation therefrom will be
permitted.
9. Till then, the 'Guest Teachers'
may be allowed to continue to function,
as they have been doing so far.”
It is the violation of the aforesaid
directions, which is alleged by the petitioner in
the present Contempt Petition. It is his plea that
in spite of direction given in the aforesaid order ...3/-
:3:
dated 30th March, 2012 to the State of Haryana to
make appointments of teachers on regular basis, the
State through its officers who are arrayed as
respondents/contemnors in the present petition are
dilli dallying the matter with sole intention to
continue with the engagement of 'Guest Teachers' in
the meantime.
It is further argued that it has happened even
when specific direction was given that exercise for
appointment of regular teachers shall be completed
as indicated in the Scheme and no further extension
or deviation would be permitted.
The matter came up from time to time for
hearing. The Haryana School Teachers Selection
Board (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) is
the authority which has to undertake the process of
making selections and on the recommendation of the
Board, Government is to make the appointments.
Though some officers of Haryana State Public
Service Commission have also been impleaded as
contemnors, it is accepted at the bar that theHaryana State Public Service Commission has no role
in making selections of the school teachers.
...4/-
:4:
The Chairman and Secretary of the Board are
arrayed as contemnors Nos. 8 and 9. An additional
affidavit dated 6th February, 2014 is filed on
behalf of these respondents Nos. 8 and 9. In this
affidavit, it is explained that insofar as the
Board is concerned, it has already undertaken and
completed the selection process. However, the
respondents are not able to make the appointment on
the basis of the selection made by the Board in
view of stay order granted by the High Court of
Punjab & Haryana on 23rd October, 2013 in some writ
petitions pending before it.
Having regard to the aforesaid facts, we are
of the opinion that no further orders/directions
are required to be passed in the matter, except
clarifying that the appointments of the candidates,
which are stated to have been already selected by
the Board, shall be made once the embargo contained
in the High Court's order dated 23rd October, 2013is lifted. We impress upon and request the High
Court to decide the said writ petitions as
expeditiously as possible.
...5/-
:5:
We further make it clear that all future
selection shall be made in accordance with the
Scheme indicated in the affidavit dated 19th March,
2012 of Surina Rajan, Financial Commissioner &
Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana,
School Education Department, Chandigarh filed in
C.W.P. No.7121 of 2010 before the High Court.
The contempt petition is disposed of in the
above terms.
....................,J.
(SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR)
....................,J.
(A.K. SIKRI)
NEW DELHI
MARCH 26, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment