The Supreme Court has held that physical training instructors (PTIs) come within the definition of “teachers” though they may not necessarily take classes within the four walls of a building.
Physical training instructors impart to students the skills and rules of various sports and games.
“Merely because a PTI/Sports Officer is not expected to conduct classes within the four walls of a college, as in the case of a Professor/Associate Professor/Assistant Professor, would not by itself make him ineligible for being treated as a teacher for all practical purposes inasmuch as most sports require training in open spaces/fields/courts etc,” a Bench headed by Justice Hima Kohli clarified.
The Bench was hearing the case of a sports officer/ PTI at Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya (university). He was challenging the university’s demand to retire him at 60 years of age. He had sought parity with the other teaching faculty whose age of superannuation was 62.
The court upheld the case of the sports instructor, saying he was “very much a ‘teacher’ as he imparted instructions to the students of the college in Physical Education”.
‘Multifarious duties’
“A physical director has multifarious duties. He not only arranges games and sports for the students every evening and looks after the procurement of sports material and the maintenance of the grounds but also arranges inter-class and inter-college tournaments and accompanies the students’ team when they go for the inter-university tournaments,” the court noted.
It was one of his important duties to guide them about the rules of the various games and sports, Justice Kohli said.
“In our view, it is inherent in the duties of a physical director that he imparts to the students various skills and techniques of these games and sports. There are a large number of indoor and outdoor games in which the students have to be trained. Therefore, he has to teach them several skills and techniques of these games apart from the rules applicable to these games,” the judgment noted.
