The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Gwalior Bench recently addressed concerns regarding a photograph-based attendance system implemented in government schools of Vidisha district. While the Court found no privacy infringement for male teachers, it emphasized the need for a secure solution to protect female teachers and girl students from potential misuse of their photographs.
During the hearing, the Court acknowledged that requiring teachers and students to send their photographs as proof of attendance does not violate male teachers' privacy. However, it raised concerns over the potential risks faced by female staff and girl students, suggesting that the state government’s Department of Information and Technology should introduce a safer alternative.
“Although the appellants are male teachers and do not face privacy issues, the concerns raised regarding female staff merit immediate attention. The state should devise a secure system, either by creating a new App or amending the existing one, to ensure privacy protection.” – Madhya Pradesh High Court
Until a better system is in place, the Court directed that female teachers may send photographs of their school premises or the Principal’s office instead of their personal images as attendance proof.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Orders Centre to Lift Ban on Ananda Vikatan's Website Over Modi-Trump Cartoon
Apart from privacy concerns, the Court also addressed the issue of “proxy teachers,” a malpractice where appointed teachers delegate their work to others for partial payment. The Court ordered the state government to take strict measures to eradicate this practice immediately.
“If the attendance of teachers is not ensured, and proxy teachers continue to replace regular teachers, it would mock the education system and undermine constitutional provisions.” – Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Court stressed the need to uphold Article 21-A of the Indian Constitution, which mandates free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen years. To fulfill this right, ensuring teachers’ presence in schools is essential.
Background of the Case
The appeal was filed by two male primary school teachers who challenged a circular issued on November 28, 2024, by the CEO of Jila Panchayat, Vidisha. The circular mandated that all teachers mark their attendance at 10:00 AM and stay present until 4:00 PM. To confirm their presence, they were required to submit a JIO Tap Photo on WhatsApp to the Control Room of the Block Resource Coordinator (BRC) Office and the District Education Center.
The appellants argued that this rule contradicted a prior policy issued by the School Education Department on November 15, 2019. According to that policy, school attendance was overseen by a School Academy Committee consisting of teachers and parents, making the new photograph-based system unnecessary.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Restricts Further FIRs Against TN Deputy CM Udhayanidhi Stalin Over 'Sanatana Dharma' Remarks
State’s Justification
The state government defended the new attendance mechanism, stating that it was implemented due to irregularities in teachers’ presence at schools. Officials observed that some teachers were frequently absent, while others hired substitutes to work in their place. The new system was introduced to curb such malpractices and ensure that teachers fulfill their duty of imparting education properly.
Findings and Final Ruling
After reviewing the case, the Court concluded that:
- The attendance system is valid – The requirement for teachers to submit attendance via photograph is neither arbitrary nor illegal.
- Female teachers’ privacy must be safeguarded – The state must develop an alternative attendance verification method for female staff.
- Strict action against proxy teachers – Any teacher found engaging in proxy teaching will face civil, service, and criminal consequences.
- A technical solution is required – The state’s IT department should create or modify an app to ensure both privacy protection and attendance verification.
- Financial penalty on appellants – The appeal was deemed “misconceived,” and the petitioners were ordered to pay Rs. 2,500 each to the High Court Legal Services Authority within one month.
Case Title: Mahesh Kumar Koli and Another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, WRIT APPEAL NO. 353/2025
