Is teacher deployment for voter roll revision mandatory? Delhi HC asks poll panel
The Delhi High Court has asked the Election Commission to clarify whether school teachers can be mandatorily deployed for electoral roll revision work. The case raises concerns over disrupted classes and whether non-teaching staff should be used first.
The Delhi High Court on Friday asked the Election Commission to spell out its stand on a petition that has raised concerns over the large-scale requisition of government school teachers as booth level officers and enumeration staff for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the national capital.
A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought a short affidavit from the commission and questioned whether it could make it mandatory for government school teachers to serve as BLOs and enumeration staff. The matter will now be heard on July 28.
The plea was filed by lawyers Rajesh Kumar Gogna and Ashok Agarwal. During the hearing, counsel for the Election Commission said the Special Intensive Revision was a pan-India exercise and government teachers were required to work only during non-teaching hours or on holidays.
He said teachers were compensated and given an honorarium, and that "only 10-14 per cent are eventually called upon" for the exercise. "If a request is made for nine teachers, the school deploys only 3-4. I don't have a problem with four teachers showing up," the EC's lawyer said, adding that the Commission took a "liberal" view in such matters.
The court said it would close the PIL if the EC counsel stated that the participation of teachers was voluntary and not mandatory. "Can it be said to be mandatory? Somebody is not interested in your honorarium or compensation. They need rest. It should be voluntary. Taking shade of Article 324 (of the Constitution), you can do whatever you want?" the bench orally remarked.
"If you are calling them volunteers, make that statement. We will dispose of it," the bench said, while observing that the teachers were not employees of the Commission and that refusal to follow the Commission's instructions was a punishable offence.
The court then directed the EC to file a short affidavit stating its stand by Monday.
According to the petition, it has been filed in the public interest to protect the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21 and 21A of lakhs of children studying in government, municipal and government-aided schools in Delhi, whose teachers have been requisitioned for the Special Intensive Revision process.
The petitioners said they moved the court to protect the right to education of these students, contending that in several schools the entire regular faculty had been withdrawn during teaching hours, leaving classes to be handled either by guest teachers or by teachers of unrelated subjects.
"The deployment is contrary to the law declared in Election Commission of India v. St. Mary's School, violates section 27 read with Sections 25-26 of the RTE Act, 2009, and ignores the vast pool of non-teaching staff of the authorities amenable to requisition under Section 159 of the Representation of the People Act," the petition said.
The plea has sought directions to the authorities to rationalise the deployment of school teachers by capping it at 10 per cent and scheduling their duties outside teaching hours. It has also asked that available non-teaching staff be used first for the Special Intensive Revision process. The court will consider the Commission's response when the matter comes up next week.
The Delhi High Court on Friday asked the Election Commission to spell out its stand on a petition that has raised concerns over the large-scale requisition of government school teachers as booth level officers and enumeration staff for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the national capital.
A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought a short affidavit from the commission and questioned whether it could make it mandatory for government school teachers to serve as BLOs and enumeration staff. The matter will now be heard on July 28.
The plea was filed by lawyers Rajesh Kumar Gogna and Ashok Agarwal. During the hearing, counsel for the Election Commission said the Special Intensive Revision was a pan-India exercise and government teachers were required to work only during non-teaching hours or on holidays.
He said teachers were compensated and given an honorarium, and that "only 10-14 per cent are eventually called upon" for the exercise. "If a request is made for nine teachers, the school deploys only 3-4. I don't have a problem with four teachers showing up," the EC's lawyer said, adding that the Commission took a "liberal" view in such matters.
The court said it would close the PIL if the EC counsel stated that the participation of teachers was voluntary and not mandatory. "Can it be said to be mandatory? Somebody is not interested in your honorarium or compensation. They need rest. It should be voluntary. Taking shade of Article 324 (of the Constitution), you can do whatever you want?" the bench orally remarked.
"If you are calling them volunteers, make that statement. We will dispose of it," the bench said, while observing that the teachers were not employees of the Commission and that refusal to follow the Commission's instructions was a punishable offence.
The court then directed the EC to file a short affidavit stating its stand by Monday.
According to the petition, it has been filed in the public interest to protect the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21 and 21A of lakhs of children studying in government, municipal and government-aided schools in Delhi, whose teachers have been requisitioned for the Special Intensive Revision process.
The petitioners said they moved the court to protect the right to education of these students, contending that in several schools the entire regular faculty had been withdrawn during teaching hours, leaving classes to be handled either by guest teachers or by teachers of unrelated subjects.
"The deployment is contrary to the law declared in Election Commission of India v. St. Mary's School, violates section 27 read with Sections 25-26 of the RTE Act, 2009, and ignores the vast pool of non-teaching staff of the authorities amenable to requisition under Section 159 of the Representation of the People Act," the petition said.
The plea has sought directions to the authorities to rationalise the deployment of school teachers by capping it at 10 per cent and scheduling their duties outside teaching hours. It has also asked that available non-teaching staff be used first for the Special Intensive Revision process. The court will consider the Commission's response when the matter comes up next week.
The Delhi High Court on Friday asked the Election Commission to spell out its stand on a petition that has raised concerns over the large-scale requisition of government school teachers as booth level officers and enumeration staff for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the national capital.
A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought a short affidavit from the commission and questioned whether it could make it mandatory for government school teachers to serve as BLOs and enumeration staff. The matter will now be heard on July 28.
The plea was filed by lawyers Rajesh Kumar Gogna and Ashok Agarwal. During the hearing, counsel for the Election Commission said the Special Intensive Revision was a pan-India exercise and government teachers were required to work only during non-teaching hours or on holidays.
He said teachers were compensated and given an honorarium, and that "only 10-14 per cent are eventually called upon" for the exercise. "If a request is made for nine teachers, the school deploys only 3-4. I don't have a problem with four teachers showing up," the EC's lawyer said, adding that the Commission took a "liberal" view in such matters.
The court said it would close the PIL if the EC counsel stated that the participation of teachers was voluntary and not mandatory. "Can it be said to be mandatory? Somebody is not interested in your honorarium or compensation. They need rest. It should be voluntary. Taking shade of Article 324 (of the Constitution), you can do whatever you want?" the bench orally remarked.
"If you are calling them volunteers, make that statement. We will dispose of it," the bench said, while observing that the teachers were not employees of the Commission and that refusal to follow the Commission's instructions was a punishable offence.
The court then directed the EC to file a short affidavit stating its stand by Monday.
According to the petition, it has been filed in the public interest to protect the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21 and 21A of lakhs of children studying in government, municipal and government-aided schools in Delhi, whose teachers have been requisitioned for the Special Intensive Revision process.
The petitioners said they moved the court to protect the right to education of these students, contending that in several schools the entire regular faculty had been withdrawn during teaching hours, leaving classes to be handled either by guest teachers or by teachers of unrelated subjects.
"The deployment is contrary to the law declared in Election Commission of India v. St. Mary's School, violates section 27 read with Sections 25-26 of the RTE Act, 2009, and ignores the vast pool of non-teaching staff of the authorities amenable to requisition under Section 159 of the Representation of the People Act," the petition said.
The plea has sought directions to the authorities to rationalise the deployment of school teachers by capping it at 10 per cent and scheduling their duties outside teaching hours. It has also asked that available non-teaching staff be used first for the Special Intensive Revision process. The court will consider the Commission's response when the matter comes up next week.
