The Delhi High Court has issued directives to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to ensure that election-related responsibilities assigned to schoolteachers do not become overly burdensome or stressful. The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, acknowledged the ECI’s authority to engage teachers in tasks such as electoral roll revisions. However, they emphasized the importance of adhering to Section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), which restricts teachers from undertaking non-educational work unless it is related to population census, disaster relief, or election duties.
While addressing these concerns, the Bench noted, “Teachers already have an extensive workload with 6-8 hours in school. Assigning them additional election duties could lead to excessive stress. It is imperative for the ECI and its officers to consider the potential stress election-related duties can impose on teachers, especially after school hours and on non-teaching days. Consequently, we direct that the ECI should ensure election duties do not result in an unbearable burden on teachers.”
This decision comes amidst a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the requisition of schoolteachers for the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi. The Court, during a prior hearing, had questioned the ECI’s decision to deploy teachers for SIR duties, probing whether the commission was leveraging Article 324 of the Constitution to overstep its bounds. Article 324 grants the ECI authority over the management, direction, and control of elections to Parliament and State legislatures.
The Court queried the ECI’s authority in directing schoolteachers to undertake SIR duties and expected the election body to be considerate of the stress teachers face. In response, the ECI submitted an affidavit detailing the number of teachers involved in election duties and reaffirming adherence to the Supreme Court’s directives. The affidavit clarified that no teacher was engaged in SIR duties during school hours.
The petitioner, however, contested these assertions, alleging that some teachers were engaged in SIR tasks during school hours. The High Court stated that the petitioner must provide evidence of any breach of the Supreme Court’s judgment, emphasizing that the ECI had provided a detailed factsheet on the deployment of Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and volunteers. The Bench offered the petitioners an opportunity to file a reply to the ECI’s affidavit, with the case scheduled for a hearing on August 20.
More Read
Advocates Rajesh Kumar Gogna and Ashok Agarwal, who filed the PIL, argue that the requisition of teachers for SIR duties disrupts educational activities, particularly affecting schools serving underprivileged communities, while private schools remain unaffected. The petitioners contended that such deployment violates the legal precedent set by the Election Commission of India v. St. Mary’s School and sections 25-27 of the RTE Act, 2009. The petition highlighted that the duties require teachers to engage in full-day training sessions, house-to-house visits, and data verification during school hours, causing continuous disruption to their primary teaching responsibilities.
The plaintiffs further alleged that the ECI’s actions were discriminatory, as teachers were withdrawn from government, municipal, and aided schools, leaving private unaided schools untouched. They argued that the ECI should first exhaust the pool of non-teaching staff before requisitioning teachers. The petition suggested limiting the requisition of teachers to 10 percent of the regular teaching staff of any school.
