private aided schools due to the fact that with reference to the prevailing norms certain private aided schools are having excess strength of students with less staff and certain other schools are having meagre strength of pupils with more teachers. 2. Government, in this regard, have taken into account the following conclusive observations of the Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 1578 of 2005 & batch and W.P.No.21793 of 2005 & batch, dt:29.12.2006, made while dealing with the provisions relating to rationalization in G.O.Ms.No.103, Education (Ser.V) Department dated: 05.08.2005. (i) However, we feel that it will be more prudent for the Government to examine the entire issue (here Rationalization) objectively and take corrective measures if it is found that the norms are contrary to the provisions contained in Rule 10 (12) or 10 (17) of the 1993 Rules (i.e. G.O.Ms.No.1, Edn. (PS.2) Department, dt:01-01-1994) applicable to private aided and un-aided schools. (ii) However, it is made clear that this order shall not prevent the competent authorities from undertaking fresh exercise for rationalization, which may lead to declaration of certain teachers’ surplus and for absorption of such surplus teachers. 3. Further, Government have taken into account the related provision of Right to Education Act, 2009 namely, Section 25(1) which reads that,“Within six months from the date of commencement of this Act, the appropriate Government and the local authority shall ensure that the Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR), as specified in the Schedule, is maintained in each school.” 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its Judgment dt:12.04.2012 in WP(C) No. 95 of 2010 while upholding constitutional validity of the RTE Act 2009, made the following observations: (a) “The State is also expected to first weed out those schools which are non performing or under performing or non compliance schools and upon closure of such schools, the students and teaching and non teaching staff thereof should be transferred.., (Para 8 of the Judgment).” (b) “Needless to observe that if there is inadequate response to the Government funded school, it is but appropriate that either the divisions there of or the school itself be closed and the students and staff of such schools be transferred.., (Para 8 of the Judgment).” (c) “In our view even State Government must take opportunity to re organize its financial outflow at the micro level by weeding out non performing or under performing or non compliance schools receiving grant – in –aid so as to ensure that only such Government funded schools who fulfill norms and standards are allowed to continue. (Para 8 of the Judgment).” 5. Further, Government have noted the following recent developments in the Country and in the State for the purpose of revising staff pattern keeping in view pupil teacher ratio and subject needs of schools. (i) Government of India have enacted Right to Education Act, 2009 applicable to elementary education (class I to VIII). According to schedule of the Act, pupil teacher ratio for primary classes (I to V) is one teacher for thirty pupils approximately and for Upper Primary classes (VI to VIII), it is one teacher for thirty five pupils, approximately. (ii) Government of India have evolved pupil teacher ratio
norms for teachers for curricular subjects, Maths, S ciences, English, Social Studies and regional languages for teaching classes IX and X vide Ministry of Human Resource Development Department D.O. Lr. No. 1-42/2011-Sch-1, Dated: 03.08.2011, wherein pupil teacher ratio fixed is not exceeding one teacher for thirty two pupils. (iii) Three language formula to be followed in accordance with the National Policy on Education (NPE) 1986. (iv) A.P.S.C.E.R.T has developed State curriculum frame work 2011 in accordance with rule 25 of A.P. Right to Education Rules 2010. (v) Orders on subject wise weightages for various classes in Time Table in schools in the State (number of periods per subject per class per week) issued in G.O.Ms.No.63 Education (SE. Prog.I) Department, dated: 26.07.2012. 6. Keeping in view the above Court Directions, imbalance of teaching staff in private aided schools and recent developments in the Country and in the State and after careful examination of the matter, Government have decided to rationalize positioning of aided teachers in private aided schools as per the revised staff pattern and norms and modalities given in this G.O. including its Annexures. These revised staff patterns provide for better pupil teacher ratio than what is indicated in Rule 10 (12) of the Rules issued in G.O. under reference 1st read above as they are designed in accordance with the norms and standards of Right to Education Act, 2009 and Rashtriya Madhyamika Shiksha Abhiyan.(RMSA). 7. Accordingly, Government hereby order that Rationalization of Aided Teachers and Non-teaching staff in Aided schools shall be taken up for promotions of qualified teachers/non-teaching staff as per seniority in their unit within the District and identification and transfer of surplus teachers and non-teaching staff to the needy aided schools within the District, in relaxation of ban imposed in Govt. Memo. No.12080/COSE/A2/2004-4, Dt.20.10.2004 and Govt. Memo. No.8544/PS.1/2005-3 Education Department, dated : 14.11.2005, to the limited extent of transfers and promotions required for the present rationalization exercise during the schedule to be notified by the Commissioner & Director of School Education, Hyderabad, for this purpose. 8. The following principles / guidelines shall be adopted for rationalization of the services of teachers working against Grant-in-aid posts in private aided Schools: (1) There shall not be any increase in the number of posts admitted to Grant-in-Aid in a private aided school on account of present rationalization. (2) Under the present rationalization, posts will not be shifted from one school to another. Only surplus teachers of a school will be transferred to other needy schools subject to condition that an equal number of Sanctioned Aided Posts (SAP) are available and vacant in the needy school within the District. (3) The scope and purpose of the present rationalization exercise is limited to promotions of qualified teachers as per seniority in their unit within the District by the Management and transfers of teachers by the management within the district in their respective unit as per MATPP explained in para (5) below and identification of and transfer of surplus teachers working against aided posts from one school to another by District Level Committee of Rule 8(b) below according to need
ñbÕ<Ûë´j·T
40
E?…’ 2013