Teachers' Absence In Schools Frustrates RTE Act: Allahabad High Court Directs UP Govt To Frame On-Time Attendance Policy In 3 Months

A bench of Justice Prakash Padia, while disposing of the writ petitions, also issued a mandamus to the State Government to frame a policy ensuring the "presence of teachers in school within time" positively within three months.

In its 22-page order, the single judge observed that while teachers are the "pillars of knowledge" and revered as 'Guru' in the Indian culture, the State government has an obligation to ensure imparting unbarred education to children.

The Court was hearing petitions filed by Indra Devi and Leena Singh Chauhan, both Government school teachers, challenging orders passed by the District Basic Education Officer suspending them, specifically on the ground that they were not found in the institution during the inspection.

At the outset, Justice Padia underscored the sanctity of the teaching profession, noting that teachers are "educators, mentors, guides and inspirations".

Drawing from the Brahmanda Puran, the Court noted the ancient elevation of the teacher: "Guru is Shiva sans his three eyes, Vishnu sans his four arms, Brahma sans his four heads. He is parama Shiva himself in human form."

The Court also referred to the view of the Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi, that "a teacher cannot be without character. If he lacks it, he will be like salt without its savour".

Further, the single judge also referred to certain Supreme Court judgments, including Avinash Nagra vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (1997) and the recent Parimal Kumar vs. State of Jharkhand (2025) to reiterate that a teacher's primary function is to transmit the intellectual and ethical values to the young.

"The reverence accorded to teachers in Indian culture is not merely symbolic but reflects a deep seated recognition of their transformative role. From the ancient Gurukula system to present day educational frame work teachers have consistently carried forward the legacy of knowledge, values and ethical conduct. Any dilution of the status, dignity of teachers would have far reaching consequence not only for students but society at large", the bench further remarked

Despite the high praise for the teachers, the Court took a stern view of the practical reality, as it observed that teachers are not attending the institution on time.

Justice Padia noted that the Court is flooded with matters pertaining to the attendance and non-attendance of teachers. He remarked thus:

"It is well known fact that in large number of primary institutions throughout the State of U.P., teachers are not attending the institution on time. It is obligation on the State to ensure imparting unbarred education to children belonging to the primary institutions. The matters are coming every day before this Court in which allegations were made against the teachers and headmasters of the institution to the effect that they are not attending the institution within time"

The Court categorically said that in case teachers do not attend the institution within time, it will frustrate the mandate of the Act, 2009 [RTE Act] and the children will be deprived of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21-A of the Constitution of India."

Consequently, the Court refused to interfere with the impugned suspension orders. It directed the disciplinary authority to conclude the proceedings against the petitioners expeditiously and favourably within two months.

During the proceedings of the case, the Chief Standing Counsel for the State apprised the bench about the administrative steps being taken by the government regarding the digital attendance of staff.

Thus, a specific mandamus was issued to the Special Secretary, Basic Education, State of U.P. to take a policy decision for ensuring the presence of teachers. This decision has to be taken positively within a period of 3 months as per the HC's order.