High Court Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt.Pushpa Mishra vs Secretary The State Of Madhya … on 14 May, 2010

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt.Pushpa Mishra vs Secretary The State Of Madhya … on 14 May, 2010
                             W.P.NO.6117/2010
14-05-2010

       Shri Vipin Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners.
       In view of the law laid down in the case of Hukum Singh Vs.
State of M.P. & Others, 2009(1) MPJR, SN 5, I.A. No. 5585/2010 is
allowed. Petitioners are permitted to file this petition by paying one set
of Court-fee.
       The petitioners are working as contract teachers and are
specialized in imparting training and education to the disabled
children. According to the petitioners, they are working continuously
for long period of time and are engaged on contract basis for
imparting education to disabled children. It is stated that presently
the petitioners are working on contract basis under the Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan. The grievances of the petitioners are that the Union of India
through the           Ministry of Human Resources Development          has
formulated a policy Annexure P-4 for appointing such types teachers
in each regular institution for imparting training and education to the
disabled children and        while appointing such teachers   on regular
basis in the school preference is to be given to the teachers who
have experience like the petitioners, contending that the petitioners
claim for regular appointment to the school in accordance to the
policy Annexure P-4 is not being considered, the petitioner has filed
this writ petition.
       Taking note of the aforesaid grievance of the petitioners,
respondent nos. 1 to 3 are directed to consider the           policy    as

contained in Annexure P-4 and issue necessary directions to the
District Education Officer and other officials for considering the
candidature of the petitioners for granting regular appointment to
them in the school as per policy Annexure P-4. On the petitioners’
filing a certified copy of this order, it is expected that respondent nos.

2

1 to 3 shall issue necessary instructions within a period of two
months and communicate their decision to the petitioners.

The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.

(RAJENDRA MENON)
JUDGE
hsp.