Case Note & Summary
The matter involved two writ petitions before the High Court of Bombay at Goa. Writ Petition No. 359 of 2009 was filed by Dr. Gopal Chandra Pradhan, a surplus lecturer, seeking directions against the State of Goa for deployment to the post of Director of SCERT or Principal of a Government College or any other commensurate post. Writ Petition No. 589 of 2010 was filed by Nirmala Education Society, a registered minority educational society under the Societies Registration Act 1860, along with Nirmala Institute of Education and its Principal Dr. (Sr.) Rita Paes, challenging two State orders that directed restart of the M.Ed. course and redeployment of two surplus lecturers back to the institute. The petitioners alleged violation of their fundamental right under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India to administer their educational institution. The Nirmala Institute of Education had conducted the M.Ed. course since 1967-68 as a part-time course and full-time from 1991. Respondent no.6, Dr. Gopal Chandra Pradhan, was appointed as Lecturer on temporary basis on 22.07.1993 and regularized on 13.06.1994 exclusively for the M.Ed. course. Respondent no.7, Dr. Susanta Kumar Pradhan, was appointed on 17.03.1994 temporary and regularized on 25.07.1994 for the M.Ed. course. Due to poor response for admission, the State directed discontinuance of the M.Ed. course from academic year 2004-05 on 23.07.2004, and on 03.11.2004 directed permanent closure, declaring respondents 6 and 7 as surplus, with full salary to be paid by the institute until adjusted. On 03.04.2006, the State redeployed respondents 6 and 7 to the State Institute of Education (SIE) under the Directorate of School Education, granting them the status of Government Gazetted Officers and designating them as Subject Inspectors (Languages). In July 2010, the State issued impugned orders dated 06.07.2010 and 12.07.2010 approving the restart of the M.Ed. course at the institute and directing redeployment of respondents 6 and 7 to their previous posts. The order further directed that if the institute was unable to restart the M.Ed. course, the respondents be accommodated against existing vacancies occupied by contract teachers, with pay and allowances released through grant-in-aid. The petitioners challenged these orders in Writ Petition No. 589 of 2010, contending that they constituted an assault on their right to administer the institute under Article 30(1). The High Court granted Rule on 18.08.2010 with interim relief that the petitioners shall not be compelled to restart the M.Ed. course or employ respondents 6 and 7, while clarifying that the State's liability to pay their salaries remained. It was admitted that respondents 6 and 7 continued as employees of SCERT. The extracted portion of the judgment ends with the opening submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners; the final decision and reasoning are not available in the provided text.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Minority Educational Institutions - Right to Administer - Constitution of India, Article 30(1) - The petitioner minority society challenged State orders dated 06.07.2010 and 12.07.2010 directing restart of M.Ed. course and redeployment of surplus lecturers, claiming violation of Article 30(1). The High Court granted interim relief preventing compulsion to restart and employ the surplus lecturers. Final decision not provided in extracted text (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned orders dated 06.07.2010 and 12.07.2010 issued by the State of Goa violate the fundamental right of the petitioner minority institution under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India to administer its educational institution. Whether the State can compel a minority institution to restart a discontinued course and redeploy surplus employees against its will. In Writ Petition No. 359 of 2009, whether Dr. Gopal Chandra Pradhan is entitled to be deployed to the post of Director of SCERT or Principal of a Government College or any other commensurate post.
Law Points
- Minority educational institution has right to administer under Article 30(1) of Constitution of India
- State cannot compel minority institution to restart a closed course and redeploy surplus employees
- Redeployment orders must respect institutional autonomy
- Grant-in-aid does not permit State to override management rights.
