Allahabad High Court

C/M KISAN MAJDOOR MADHYAMIK VIDYALAYA, ETAWAH, AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: MANJU RANI CHAUHAN

Holding

The petition is dismissed; the State's order denying the appointment of the three Assistant Teachers is upheld.

Summary

The petitioners, a grant‑in‑aid junior high school, sought to fill three vacant Assistant Teacher posts that had become vacant through superannuation. The State, relying on a Government Order dated 25‑01‑2019 and a student‑teacher ratio of 35:1 under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, denied the request, holding that the school’s enrolment did not justify the posts. The petitioners argued that the Government Order was inapplicable and that the reduction in student strength could not arbitrarily reduce sanctioned teaching posts without due procedure. The Court noted the earlier direction to revisit the matter and examined the applicability of the ratio rule, concluding that the State’s order was lawful. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the State can lawfully deny filling vacant Assistant Teacher posts on the ground of the student‑teacher ratio prescribed under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
Whether the Government Order dated 25‑01‑2019 is applicable to the present case and can be invoked to reject the petitioner's request.
Whether a reduction in student strength permits a reduction in sanctioned teaching posts without following the prescribed procedure.

Legislation cited

Subjects

grant‑in‑aid school
teacher vacancy
student‑teacher ratio
Right to Education
government order
illegal and arbitrary order
appointment of teachers

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 19666 of 2019

C/M Kisan Majdoor Madhyamik Vidyalaya,
Etawah, And Another .....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Yogesh Kumar Saxena
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vikram Bahadur Singh

Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

1. List is revised. None appears on behalf of the petitioners.

2. The matter is of the year 2019.

3. Heard Ms. Anuradha Sundaram, learned Additional Chief Standing
Counsel for the State-respondent nos.1 to 3 and perused the record.

4. The instant writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the
impugned order dated 11.09.2019 passed by respondent no.4 and a further
prayer to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to fill the post in
question.

5. Records show that in the petitioner's institution, which is imparting
education from Class-VI to VIII and has been recognized under the
provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act is also receiving grant-in-aid
under the provisions of Act No.6 of Uttar Pradesh Junior High School
(Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1978
(hereinafter referred to as Act of 1978). There are 7 posts of Assistant
Teachers, 1 Headmaster, 1 Clerk, 3 Class-IV Employees sanctioned in the
Institution vide order dated 13.01.1987. The aforesaid posts including 1
Headmaster and 7 Assistant Teachers were appointed and were paid
salary under the provisions of Act of 1978. Accordingly, all the aforesaid
persons were being paid salary. Thereafter, some persons retired from
their respective posts and the same were filled up, in accordance with law
there being no dispute regarding their appointments. Three Assistant
WRIA No. 19666 of 2019
2

Teachers have retired on account of superannuation in the year 2015,
2016 and 2017 but on account of ban by the State Government, the
aforesaid three posts of Assistant Teacher could not be filled up.
Thereafter, the petitioner sought permission for filling up the three vacant
posts but respondent no.3 vide order dated 24.03.2018 denied the same
and held that there are minimum sanctioned/prescribed posts i.e. 1
Headmaster and 4 Assistant Teachers which were to be filled upon the
basis of the government circular. The aforesaid order dated 24.03.2018
was challenged by the petitioner by means of filing Writ-A No.10418 of
2018 (C/M Kisan Mazdoor Madhymik Vidyalaya Puraila And Another
vs. State of U.P. And 2 Others) in which the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the competent
authority to re-visit the issue, keeping in view the observations made in
Writ Petition No.36910 of 2016 (C/M Dwivedi Mahadev Prasad Purva
Madhyamik Vidyalaya vs. State of U.P. and others) as decided on
23.02.2018.

6. In compliance of the aforesaid, respondent no.3 has passed the
impugned order dated 11.09.2019 by which the request for filling up the
posts in question has been rejected on the basis of subsequent
Government Order dated 25.01.2019 that too on the basis of sudden
sudden inspection by the Khand Shiksha Adhikari. Records show that the
aforesaid order has been challenged on the following grounds that the
same is illegal as the Government Order dated 25.01.2019 is not
applicable in the present case. The impugned order has been passed on the
basis of sudden inspection by the Khand Shiksha Adhikari about which
no information was given which is against the procedure provided under
the relevant Government Order, therefore, based on such inspection, the
impugned order cannot be sustain.

7. The reduction in the strength of the students cannot be a ground for
reducing the sanctioned strength of teaching staff in the said Institution.
Even if the strength of the students were found to be less, a proper
procedure was to be followed to reduce the strength of teachers, in case
required, therefore, the impugned order is said to be illegal, arbitrary and
a prayer has been made to quash the same.
WRIA No. 19666 of 2019
3

8. Despite service of notice upon respondent no.4 being sufficient, no
counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf. Records further reveals that
the petitioner has also not filed any rejoinder affidavit to the counter
affidavit filed on behalf of the State.

9. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State submits that
on account of coming up of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory
Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as Act of 2009) the
appropriate amendments were made to the Act of 1978 by the 7th
Amendment Rules and the ratio of Assistant was 35:1 and as the
academic session 2020-21 of the Institution disclosed that the enrolled
students were 32, 43 and 37 in Class VI, VII & VIII respectively,
therefore, there was no occasion of granting permission for appointment
of excess number of teachers.

10. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is dismissed,
accordingly.

11. There shall be no order as to costs.

(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
September 29, 2026
K.N.

Digitally signed by :-
KALP NATH SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…