news details |
|
|
| HC quashes circular issued by CEO Kishtwar imposing ban on teaching activities of by Masters/lecturers | | | ASIF IQBAL NAIK
Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 1: In a significant judgment High Court held that the impugned circular issued by Chief Education Officer Kishtwar is beyond the scope and ambit of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education of 2009 particularly Section 28 thereof and therefore, cannot be applied to Govt. Teaching Faculty of Higher Secondary Schools and Colleges.
The High Court held that the circular would have its applicability only to the Govt. Schools imparting elementary education i.e. Schools upto 8th Standard and to that extent the circular has been upheld.
As per the details available with Early Times, the petitioner Farooq Ahmed assailed the impugned Circular bearing No.CEO/K/Monitoring/20/14887-967 dated 21-11-2020 through his counsel Faheem Shokat Butt Advocate, whereby all the DDOs/Controlling Officers working in District Kishtwar have been called upon to issue strict instructions to all the teaching officials (Lecturers/ Masters/Teachers) working under their control not to indulge in private practices of giving luxury education at private coaching institutions.
The impugned circular is purported to have been issued under Section 28 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education of 2009, which has become applicable to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir in terms of Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019. The impugned circular was assailed by Advocate Butt on the ground that the said circular is without any competence and authority of law, for, Section 28 of the Act of 2009 is only applicable to the teachers engaging in imparting elementary education.
The Elementary Education in terms of Section 2(f) of the Act of 2009 means the education from 1st Class to 8th Class. It is further contended that the said Circular imposing complete ban is violative of Circular dated 25-09-2017 issued by the School Education Department which permits private tuition by the teaching faculty of the Department with prior sanction from the competent authority.
The High Court agreed with the contention of the counsel of petitioner and held that the impugned circular issued by Chief Education Officer, Kishtwar under Section 28 of the Act of 2009 is beyond his competence and cannot sustain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
