Protected teachers bleed exchequer white

The finance department then brought in a rider that such teachers would draw only half the salary

Update: 2015-08-07 04:38 GMT
Teachers click photos of CM Oommen Chandy and industries minister P.K. Kunhalikutty during the Shihab Thangal Award Day 2014 organised by the Kerala School Teachers' Union at VJT Hall in Thiruvananthapuram recently. (Photo: FILE)

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Whittling down norms governing aided school teachers, who have been over the years rendered surplus by a fall in student strength and consequent loss of sanctioned vacancies, has ballooned into a colossal burden on the exchequer and worse.

This will impose a logical squeeze on PSC appointments since the Government would prefer to pack off protected teachers to Government schools, as some of them have already been deployed.

There is also a proposal to appoint protected teachers as district officers in the new minority welfare offices to be set up in 14 district collectorates.     

The phenomenon of Protected Teachers began with the Government order on March 6, 1969, aimed at preventing the retrenchment of teachers, who had completed two academic years and drew two vacation salaries. The logic was they could not be faulted for the erosion in student strength.  

But a series of orders followed, allowing same school retention to certain categories: senior grade teachers, those suffering from cancer and wives of Defence personnel.

Education minister Baby John sought to phase out protection and save the exchequer by introducing a new rule in 1979 — Rule 6 (VIII) of Chapter V of Kerala Education Rules to absorb protected teachers in new schools, which he executed through an agreement with private managers.

Later the Government set off a new cut-off (extension of deadline), saying protection would not be granted to those appointed after August 1, 1984.

This was further diluted in 1996 when a new order was issued, affording protection to surplus teachers who had completed seven years of service as on July 15, 1995. But they would be deployed to Government or aided schools.

Another regressive order was issued in 1999 allowing surplus teachers to be retained by the parent school, irrespective of class divisions and sanctioned posts of teachers. The order extended protection cap to July 15, 1997.

GO (P) 112/2001 Gen Edu on March 26, 2001, held that all aided school regular teachers appointed prior to July 14, 1996, who did not have seven years of regular service on/before July 15, 1995 and not in service as on July 14, 1996 are eligible for protection.

The finance department then brought in a rider that such teachers would draw only half the salary. But this was soon withdrawn under pressure by education department.

Later, considering the huge financial outgo, the education department ordered that private school managers should absorb one protected teacher each in schools sanctioned after 1979-80. Modalities for protection and redeployment were issued and same school retention was abolished.

The present Government in October 2011 introduced the teachers’ package, with retrospective effect for appointing teachers who had stood unapproved for want of Government sanction.

The Government subsequently issued a separate order for specialist teachers (a large number of surplus staff belong to the specialist category of music, physical education, language) and a spate of individual orders, regularising unapproved posts.   

The teachers’ package and connected orders were quashed by a single bench, which was subsequently partially stayed by a division bench.

The division bench also directed Government not to deploy teachers from the bank to aided schools. However, the latest order of the Chandy Government creates an extended pool of protected teachers.

Similar News