Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Dhananjay Bhagwandas Devi and Dilip Sampatti Aldar, were appointed as temporary teachers in the respondent institutions (Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil College of Engineering and Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil Polytechnic, run by Rayat Shikshan Sanstha) on 1st August 2019 and 1st July 2019 respectively. They were paid salaries from time to time. However, on 30th June 2023, their services were terminated abruptly without any prior notice or opportunity of hearing. The termination letters stated that their appointments were not approved by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the University. The petitioners challenged the termination by filing writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The respondents argued that the petitioners were temporary employees and their appointments were subject to approval, which was not granted, and therefore the termination was valid. The court examined the principles of natural justice and the AICTE regulations. It held that even temporary employees have a right to be heard before termination, especially when the termination is based on alleged lack of approval. The court noted that the respondents themselves failed to take steps to obtain approval for the petitioners' appointments and cannot now use that as a ground to terminate them. The court also held that the writ petitions are maintainable as the institutions are aided and affiliated, performing public functions. The court quashed the termination orders and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioners with continuity of service and back wages, subject to the petitioners continuing to work and the respondents obtaining necessary approvals.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Temporary Employee - Natural Justice - Termination without notice or opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice - Petitioners were appointed as temporary teachers and their services were terminated abruptly without any show cause notice or hearing - Held that even a temporary employee has a right to be heard before termination, especially when the termination is stigmatic or based on alleged lack of approval (Paras 10-12). B) Technical Education - AICTE Approval - Deemed Approval - Appointment of teachers in technical institutions requires prior approval of AICTE - However, if the institution fails to obtain approval and the teacher has been working for a long period, the teacher cannot be penalized for the institution's lapse - Held that the respondents cannot terminate the petitioners on the ground of non-approval when they themselves failed to take necessary steps (Paras 13-15). C) Service Law - Writ Petition - Maintainability - Writ petition against termination by a private educational institution is maintainable if the institution is performing public function or is under the control of the State - The respondent institution is aided and affiliated, thus amenable to writ jurisdiction - Held that the writ petitions are maintainable (Para 16).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the petitioners' services as temporary teachers was valid without prior notice and opportunity of hearing, and whether the respondents' failure to obtain AICTE approval for their appointments justified their termination.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petitions, quashed the termination orders dated 30th June 2023, and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioners with continuity of service and back wages, subject to the petitioners continuing to work and the respondents obtaining necessary approvals from AICTE and the University.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- audi alteram partem
- termination of temporary employees
- AICTE regulations
- approval of appointment
- deemed approval
- writ petition maintainability
