In a significant judgment that upholds the sanctity of education, the Allahabad High Court has ruled that teachers should not be indiscriminately assigned election duties, emphasizing that their primary role is to educate. The court held that the appointment of teachers as Booth Level Officers (BLOs) should be a “measure of last resort”, only when all other categories of government employees have been exhausted.
Case Background
The case, Surya Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. & Others (WRIT – A No. 16401 of 2024), was brought before the court by Surya Pratap Singh, an assistant teacher in a primary school, challenging his appointment as a Booth Level Officer (BLO) by an order dated August 16, 2024. Singh argued that his election duties, which included revising electoral rolls, were continuous in nature and interfered with his teaching responsibilities, violating the Right to Education Act, 2009.
Legal Issues Involved
The key legal questions before the court were:
1. Whether teachers can be appointed as Booth Level Officers (BLOs) under election commission guidelines?
2. Whether such appointments interfere with the Right to Education under Article 21A of the Constitution?
3. How should election-related duties for teachers be balanced with their primary educational responsibilities?
The petitioner, represented by Advocate Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, contended that election duties imposed a perennial burden on teachers and encroached upon their ability to teach effectively. He relied on past rulings, including Sunita Sharma v. State of U.P. (2015), which held that teachers should not be diverted for non-teaching activities.
On the other hand, the State of U.P., represented by Standing Counsel C.S.C., Jitendra Ojha, and Rama Nand Pandey, argued that teachers’ appointment as BLOs was permissible under the Election Commission of India Guidelines (dated 04.10.2022) and that their duties would not interfere with teaching hours.
Court’s Observations
The judgment, delivered by Justice Ajay Bhanot, meticulously analyzed previous Supreme Court and High Court rulings on the subject. The court noted:
“Education is the bulwark of a nation’s freedom and the engine of economic prosperity. It is not merely book learning imparted in a classroom but a holistic process of human development.”
The court cited the Supreme Court ruling in Election Commission of India v. St. Mary’s School (2008), which underscored that while election duties are vital, they should not come at the cost of primary education.
Additionally, the court observed:
“Teachers must not be treated as ministerial employees of the State. Their primary duty is to teach, and any additional burden must be carefully assessed to prevent encroachment on academic responsibilities.”
Key Decision and Directions
The High Court issued the following directives:
1. Teachers should not be appointed as BLOs unless all other categories of government employees (such as Patwaris, Anganwadi workers, and clerks) have been exhausted.
2. If teachers must be deployed, it should be only on holidays or after teaching hours.
3. District election officers must review and revise the list of BLOs within three months, ensuring that teachers are appointed only as a last resort.
4. Until new orders are issued, teachers currently appointed as BLOs must perform their duties outside school hours.
The court also reaffirmed the principles laid down in Nirbhay Singh v. State of U.P. (2022), where a Division Bench held that teachers cannot be deployed for election-related work during teaching hours but may be engaged on non-teaching days.
