Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the termination of Smt. Santosh Yadav, a Hindi teacher employed in a Haryana school, whose services were dispensed with on the ground that her Teacher's Training diploma from the Secondary Education Board, U.P., Bareilly was not recognized by the Haryana Government. She had been appointed on 21-10-1980 on a six-monthly basis, and her terms were continually renewed with minor gaps until she was confirmed in 1984. The Directorate of Education, Haryana had issued a letter dated 7-7-1981 stating that recruitment of teachers with diplomas from other states was irregular and directing that only holders of Haryana-recognized diplomas be appointed. However, on 22-7-1981, the same authority clarified that the ban would not apply to those already working as teachers on stop-gap, ad hoc, or six-monthly basis before the summer vacation of 1981. The appellant was precisely such a teacher, having been working on six-monthly basis immediately before that summer vacation. Despite this relaxation, her service was terminated by order dated 27-3-1990, which she challenged before the High Court. The High Court dismissed her writ petition in limine, following which she appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court considered whether the termination was arbitrary and illegal in light of her long continuous service, regularization, and the applicable relaxation. The Court noted that other similarly situated teachers had been made permanent while her service was wiped out by a stroke of the pen. It held that the State could not take advantage of its own laxity in having appointed her and renewed her terms over a decade, only to later terminate her on the very ground that had existed from the outset. The Court found that the letter dated 22-7-1981 clearly covered her case, and once she had earned regularity in service and was confirmed, the termination was wholly wrong and arbitrary. Accordingly, the Supreme Court quashed the impugned order dated 27-3-1990, directed reinstatement with back wages, regularity of service, seniority, promotion, increments, and all other service benefits as would have normally accrued to her. The appeal was allowed in these terms.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination - Arbitrary Exercise of Power - Not mentioned - The appellant, a Hindi teacher appointed on six-monthly basis since 1980 and confirmed in 1984, was terminated in 1990 solely on the ground that her Teacher's Training diploma from Secondary Education Board, U.P., Bareilly was not recognized by Haryana Government. The Court found the termination arbitrary as the State had accepted her services for a decade and regularization had been attained; the ban imposed by letter dated 7-7-1981 was relaxed by letter dated 22-7-1981 for pre-summer vacation 1981 ad hoc teachers, which covered the appellant. Held that the State cannot deprive her of job after earning regularity in service; termination order quashed with full back wages and benefits (Paras 1-2). B) Service Law - Recognition of Educational Qualifications - Applicability of Administrative Instructions - Not mentioned - The Court considered the Directorate of Education, Haryana's instruction dated 7-7-1981 banning recruitment of teachers with diplomas from other states, and its clarification dated 22-7-1981 exempting those working on stop-gap/ad hoc/six months' basis before summer vacation of 1981. The appellant was such a teacher. Held that the relaxation applied to her, and the authorities acted wrongly and arbitrarily in terminating her services. (Paras 1-2). C) Service Law - Regularisation and Confirmation - Effect of Long Continuous Service - Not mentioned - Despite initial six-monthly terms with small gaps, the appellant was confirmed in 1984, indicating acceptance of her qualification and service regularity. The Court held that once regularity was attained, later termination on the same ground of diploma non-recognition was impermissible. Direction for reinstatement with back wages, seniority, promotion, increments, and all consequential benefits. (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether termination of a teacher's services after long continuous service and regularization, on the ground that her Teacher's Training diploma from another State was not recognized by Haryana, was arbitrary and illegal; whether the relaxation of 22-7-1981 applied to the appellant.
Final Decision
The appeal was allowed. The impugned order dated 27-3-1990 (Annexure H) relieving the appellant from duties as Hindi Teacher with immediate effect was quashed. The appellant was ordered to be put back in position with back wages, regularity of service, seniority, promotion, increments and all other service benefits as would have normally accrued.
Law Points
- arbitrary termination
- non-recognition of diploma
- administrative instructions
- relaxation
- regularisation
- estoppel
- back wages
- legitimate expectation
