2013 (2) TMI 814 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Justification of High Court's direction for police verification of student strength in aided schools.
2. Legality of staff fixation based on alleged bogus admissions.
3. Role of police in educational administrative matters.
4. Mechanism for accurate student verification and staff fixation.

Summary:

1. Justification of High Court's direction for police verification of student strength in aided schools:
The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court was justified in directing the Secretary, General Education Department of Kerala to verify the actual student strength in all aided schools with police assistance. The High Court had concluded that due to the lack of investigative skills and authority within the Education Department, police assistance was necessary for accurate verification. However, the Supreme Court found that police intervention in educational matters could send a wrong signal to students and disrupt the academic atmosphere. Therefore, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's direction for police involvement.

2. Legality of staff fixation based on alleged bogus admissions:
The Assistant Educational Officer (AEO) had initially fixed the staff strength of S.N.V.U.P. School, Thalikulam for the year 2008-09. Subsequent inspections by the Super Check Cell revealed significant discrepancies, including bogus admissions and irregular staff fixation. The Director of Public Instructions (DPI) revised the staff strength based on these findings, reducing the number of divisions and posts. The Supreme Court upheld the DPI's findings and actions, recognizing the need to address the issue of bogus admissions and irregular staff fixation.

3. Role of police in educational administrative matters:
The Supreme Court emphasized that the Kerala Education Act and Rules do not prescribe any mechanism for police involvement in staff fixation processes. The presence of police in schools could cause embarrassment and create a negative impression among students. The Court directed the Education Department to implement a more scientific method for student verification, such as using Unique Identification Card (UID) technology, rather than relying on police intervention.

4. Mechanism for accurate student verification and staff fixation:
The Supreme Court acknowledged the State's efforts to develop a better mechanism for student verification and staff fixation. The State proposed using UID technology to accurately determine student numbers and ensure proper staff fixation. The Court directed the Education Department to implement this method and follow the guidelines in the circular dated 12.10.2011. The Court also allowed the State to adopt better scientific methods in the future to prevent bogus admissions.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's direction for police verification of student strength in aided schools. The Court upheld the DPI's actions regarding staff fixation based on findings of bogus admissions and directed the Education Department to implement UID technology for accurate student verification. The appeal was allowed without any order as to costs.