“Worthless” school teachers cannot claim a right to re-employment after retirement, the Delhi High Court has said.
The court’s observation came while rejecting petitions of two retired Delhi Public School teachers who alleged they were not considered for re-employment despite a 2007 notification of the directorate of education on the issue.
“The notification is not intended to force upon the educational institutions teachers who are worthless and who have lost their utility and who are standing in the way of fresh blood being inducted into the institution,” the court said.
The notification ought to be read as an incentive to teachers for improving their performance if they wanted to avail themselves of the job extension, the court observed.
“The notification seeks to grant a concession enabling the schools to re-employ the teachers and cannot be treated as conferring any rights on the teachers to continue in employment till the age of 62 years,” said the bench of Acting Chief Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice R.S. Endlaw in an order delivered March 28.
“The benefit of the notification is intended for those who have the potential for continued useful service to the institution. Non-grant of re-employment does not cast any stigma,” said the judges, dismissing the plea of Shashi Kohli and Chander Prabha Sood.
“If the notification is read as conferring a right on the teachers, the same is likely to affect the standards of teaching in education and which we are not inclined to encourage,” the court said.
The education directorate Jan 29, 2007, issued the notification asking schools to consider the re-employment of retiring teachers against clear vacancy.
It also permitted the schools to assess the professional fitness and vigilance clearance of the retiring teachers before re-employment.
The two petitioners had challenged the court’s earlier order dismissing their plea.
The retired teachers contended that the government order made it mandatory for schools to offer them a job post-retirement till the age of 62.
The school denied them re-employment, saying the notification was not applicable to private unaided schools.
The school alleged that the two teachers had an improper style of teaching, remained absent from duty without prior sanction and did not attend meetings.