Case Note & Summary
This judgment concerns four writ petitions filed by Shikshan Sevaks (teachers) whose appointments had been approved by the Education Officer but were subsequently cancelled by the Deputy Director of Education. The teachers had been appointed on 1 December 2012. Initially, the Education Officer approved the appointments on unaided basis, which was challenged. Following directions from the High Court, the Education Officer granted fresh approvals on aided basis on 2 March 2019. The management then sought to enter the petitioners' names in Salarth ID for online salary payment. After a complaint by one Akash Tambe, the Deputy Director issued show cause notices to the petitioners and, by an order dated 5 November 2019, cancelled the individual approvals. The petitioners challenged this cancellation. The core legal issue was whether the Deputy Director could review and cancel the approved appointments under the Government Resolution dated 23 August 2017, which permits such review only in cases of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression. The petitioners argued that neither the show cause notice nor the impugned order contained any allegation or finding of these three grounds, rendering the cancellation illegal. The State defended the order, contending that the reasons recorded justified the action. The court, after examining the Government Resolution and its own earlier judgments in Ansari Amina Muzhar Ali v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No. 1380 of 2019) and Writ Petition No. 10133 of 2016, held that the resolution was issued to restrict the revisional power to the limited circumstances of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression. These terms carry a judicially recognized ambit and must be specifically alleged in the show cause notice and found in the order. Perusing the notice and the order, the court found no such allegations or findings. The Assistant Government Pleader was unable to point to any existence of these factors. Consequently, the court held that the Deputy Director acted without jurisdiction. The impugned order was quashed and set aside. The court directed the authorities to record the petitioners' names in Salarth ID within three weeks and to release salary within four weeks thereafter. The rule was made absolute with no order as to costs. The judgment thereby reaffirmed the principle that administrative review powers are to be exercised strictly within the confines of the enabling resolution and cannot be enlarged absent the prescribed grounds.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Review Power - Government Resolution dated 23 August 2017 restricts the Deputy Director of Education's power of reconsideration/review to limited circumstances of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression - The impugned order cancelling approved teacher appointments did not contain any allegation or finding of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression - Held that the order was passed without jurisdiction and must be quashed; review power can only be exercised when these factors exist (Paras 9-12) B) Administrative Law - Show Cause Notice - A valid show cause notice preceding exercise of review power under the Government Resolution must mention the existence of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression - The show cause notice issued to the petitioners did not allude to any such factors - Held that the notice was defective and could not support the exercise of review power, as essential pre-conditions were not satisfied (Paras 6, 9, 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Deputy Director of Education had the jurisdiction to cancel approved Shikshan Sevak appointments in the absence of allegations or findings of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression as required under Government Resolution dated 23 August 2017.
Final Decision
The writ petitions were allowed. The impugned order dated 5th November 2019 was quashed and set aside. The Deputy Director of Education was directed to record the petitioners' names in Salarth ID within three weeks and release salary within four weeks thereafter. Rule made absolute with no costs.
Law Points
- review power limited to fraud
- misrepresentation
- suppression
- show cause notice must mention existence of these factors
- government resolution dated 23rd August 2017 restricts reconsideration to these grounds
- terms fraud
- suppression have judicially recognised ambit
