Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the termination of a teacher employed in a private school governed by the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. The respondent No.2 was initially appointed on a year-to-year temporary basis for three academic sessions starting from 01/07/2000. After acquiring a B.Ed. degree in 2005, the management passed a resolution dated 18/06/2005 to appoint him on probation for two years, and an appointment order dated 20/06/2005 was issued. The respondent No.2 possessed an M.A. in Political Science and B.Ed. and was eventually given workload in Marathi as well. He claimed that after successfully completing the probationary period, he attained deemed confirmed status, but the management prevented him from signing the muster roll from 07/10/2007 without any termination order. He filed an appeal under Section 9 of the MEPS Act before the School Tribunal, which rejected his appeal on 18/08/2008. The Single Judge of the High Court set aside the Tribunal's order on 20/12/2010 and granted reinstatement with continuity. The management challenged this order in the present Letters Patent Appeal. The appellants argued that there was no clear vacancy, the workload was insufficient, the appointment was on clock hour basis, and the respondent had abandoned service. The respondent contended that all mandatory procedures were followed, the resolution and appointment order clearly indicated probation, and no abandonment plea was raised in the written statement. The court examined the documentary evidence, particularly the appointment order's Clause No.2, where the second part dealing with probation for two years was tick marked, and the order was signed by the Secretary of the Selection Committee. The court held that the management failed to rebut this evidence and therefore a reasonable inference of clear vacancy and valid appointment arose. The defence of abandonment was not pleaded and hence unavailable. The court concluded that the employee's services could not be terminated without following the prescribed procedure and upheld the Single Judge's order granting reinstatement with continuity.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Probation and Confirmation - Appointment on probation for two years creates deemed confirmation on successful completion if vacancy is clear and procedure followed - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, Section 9 - The employee was appointed by order dated 20/06/2005 on probation for two years after a management resolution, and the appointment order clearly ticked the clause for probation; the management failed to rebut the documentary evidence. Held that the appointment was on probation in a clear vacancy and the employee acquired deemed confirmed status, so termination without notice or inquiry was invalid (Paras 9-11). B) Service Law - Abandonment of Service - Defence of abandonment requires specific pleading and evidence - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, Section 9 - The management contended that the employee abandoned service w.e.f. 07/10/2007, but no such plea was raised in the written statement before the School Tribunal; the employee's specific case was that he was prevented from signing the muster roll. Held that the abandonment defence was untenable and the management was required to terminate services by stating specific grounds (Paras 11). C) Evidence - Burden of Proof - Party relying on documentary evidence must rebut it - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, Section 9 - The appointment order and resolution were consistent and supported the employee's case; the management's assertion that the resolution was bogus was not accepted because the appointment order itself ticked the probation clause and was signed by the Secretary of the Selection Committee. Held that in the absence of rebuttal evidence, a reasonable judicial inference of clear vacancy and valid appointment arose (Paras 10-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Single Judge correctly set aside the School Tribunal's order and granted reinstatement; whether the respondent No.2 was validly appointed on probation; whether his services were illegally terminated
Final Decision
The Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed; the order of the Single Judge granting reinstatement with continuity to respondent No.2 was upheld.
Law Points
- Probationer who completes probation in a clear vacancy acquires deemed confirmation
- termination without following procedure under MEPS Act is illegal
- abandonment plea requires specific pleading
- documentary evidence must be rebutted by party denying it
- burden of proof lies on management to justify termination
