Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Temporary Teacher Seeking Approval and Regularisation of Services in Junior College. Continuous Service with Breaks and Performance of Regular Duties Establishes Entitlement to Approval Under Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Harshada Pankaj Naik, was employed as a temporary Commerce teacher at Annasaheb Vartak College of Arts, Commerce & E.S. Andrades College of Science & Junior College, run by Vidyavardhini Trust. She applied pursuant to an advertisement dated 19th June 2015 and was appointed on a temporary basis from 1st July 2015 to 7th November 2015 on a consolidated salary of Rs. 10,000 per month. Her contract was renewed annually with breaks of a few days between successive appointments, continuing until 30th April 2018. During this period, she performed duties of a regular teacher including teaching Std. 11 and 12 classes, participating in cultural activities, working as an examiner for H.S.C. examinations, and other regular duties. Despite her continuous service, the Management did not submit a proposal to the Education Department for approval of her services, and she was not made permanent. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 5257 of 2019 seeking directions to the Management to send a proposal for approval and to the Education Department to grant approval and release grant-in-aid. The present petition was filed seeking similar relief. The Court considered the issue of whether a temporary teacher with artificial breaks is entitled to approval. The Court noted that the breaks were artificial and did not break the continuity of service. The Management's failure to submit a proposal cannot prejudice the petitioner. The Court directed the Management to submit a proposal for approval within four weeks, and the Education Department to decide within eight weeks. If approval is granted, the Management must pay salary as per rules and the Department must release grant-in-aid. The petitioner is to be continued in service until the proposal is decided. The petition was allowed in these terms.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Temporary Teacher - Approval of Services - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - Sections 5, 7 - The petitioner was appointed as a temporary Commerce teacher from 2015 to 2018 with annual renewals and artificial breaks. She performed duties of a regular teacher including teaching, examination duties, and extracurricular activities. The Management failed to submit a proposal for approval to the Education Department. The Court held that the artificial breaks did not break continuity of service and the Management's failure cannot prejudice the teacher. The Education Department was directed to consider the proposal for approval on merits and release grant-in-aid if approval is granted. (Paras 1-8)

B) Service Law - Regularisation - Grant-in-Aid - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - Sections 5, 7 - The Court directed the Management to submit a proposal for approval of the petitioner's services within four weeks, and the Education Department to decide the same within eight weeks. If approval is granted, the Management must pay the petitioner salary as per rules and the Department must release grant-in-aid. The Court also directed that the petitioner be continued in service until the proposal is decided. (Paras 6-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a temporary teacher continuously employed with artificial breaks is entitled to approval of services and regularisation under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (MEPS Act)?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The Management is directed to submit a proposal for approval of the petitioner's services within four weeks. The Education Department is directed to decide the proposal within eight weeks. If approval is granted, the Management must pay the petitioner salary as per rules and the Department must release grant-in-aid. The petitioner is to be continued in service until the proposal is decided.

Law Points

  • Continuous service with artificial breaks does not defeat claim for approval
  • Management's failure to submit proposal cannot prejudice employee
  • Education Department must consider proposal on merits
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (BOM) (07) 122

Writ Petition No. 10765 of 2022

2023-07-11

G.S. Patel, Neela Gokhale

2023:BHC-AS:18972-DB

Mr NV Bandiwadekar (Senior Advocate with Vinayak Kumbhar, i/b AV Bandiwadekar) for Petitioner; Mrs PJ Gavhane (AGP) for Respondent-State

Harshada Pankaj Naik

The State of Maharashtra & Ors

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking directions to the Management to submit proposal for approval of services of a temporary teacher and to the Education Department to grant approval and release grant-in-aid.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought directions to the Management to send a proposal for approval of her services to the Education Department and to the Education Department to grant approval and release grant-in-aid for payment of salary.

Filing Reason

The Management failed to submit a proposal for approval of the petitioner's services despite her continuous employment from 2015 to 2018 with artificial breaks, and she was not made permanent.

Previous Decisions

The petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition No. 5257 of 2019 seeking similar relief, but the present petition was filed as the earlier petition was not finally disposed of.

Issues

Whether the petitioner, a temporary teacher employed with artificial breaks, is entitled to approval of her services under the MEPS Act? Whether the Management's failure to submit a proposal for approval can prejudice the petitioner's right to regularisation?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that she was continuously employed from 2015 to 2018 with artificial breaks and performed duties of a regular teacher, and the Management's failure to submit a proposal for approval was unjust. Respondent-State argued that the petitioner was a temporary teacher and not entitled to approval as per rules.

Ratio Decidendi

A temporary teacher continuously employed with artificial breaks is entitled to have her services considered for approval under the MEPS Act. The Management's failure to submit a proposal cannot prejudice the teacher. The Education Department must consider the proposal on merits and, if approval is granted, release grant-in-aid.

Judgment Excerpts

The Petitioner’s contract was renewed annually with breaks of few days in between successive appointments. Despite this, her services were not made permanent as the Management failed to submit the necessary proposal to the Education Department for approval of the Petitioner’s services. The artificial breaks did not break continuity of service and the Management's failure cannot prejudice the teacher.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 5257 of 2019 seeking similar relief. The present Writ Petition No. 10765 of 2022 was filed subsequently. The petition was heard and reserved on 26th June 2023, and judgment pronounced on 11th July 2023.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977: Sections 5, 7
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Insurance Company's Appeals in Motor Accident Claims Cases — Reduces Compensation Due to Lack of Proof of Income and Negligence. The court held that in the absence of evidence of income and negligence, the compensatio...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim for Minor Deceased — Compensation of Rs.79,500/- Upheld. Notional Income of Rs.15,000 per annum applied for a 6-year-old child under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 16...