Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Vidarbha Gramin Vikas Sanstha and its school, challenged a communication dated 21.01.2009 issued by the Special District Social Welfare Officer, Yavatmal, which cancelled the suspension order dated 19.01.2009 of respondent no.4, an employee of the school. The cancellation was solely on the ground that the management had not obtained prior permission from the department before suspending the employee pending enquiry. The High Court examined the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, particularly Rule 35 which deals with conditions of suspension. The court noted that Rule 35(4) provides that if an employee is suspended without prior approval, the management itself must pay subsistence allowance for the first four months and thereafter. However, this does not render the suspension order invalid. The court held that the power to suspend an employee is vested in the management under Rule 35, and the Special District Social Welfare Officer has no authority under Rule 33 or 28(5) to cancel such suspension merely because prior permission was not obtained. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned communication, and directed that the suspension order of respondent no.4 shall remain in force, with the management being liable to pay subsistence allowance as per Rule 35(4).
Headnote
A) Service Law - Suspension - Power of Management - Rule 35 of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 - The management of a private school has the power to suspend an employee pending enquiry under Rule 35. Failure to obtain prior approval from the appropriate authority does not invalidate the suspension order; it only shifts the liability to pay subsistence allowance to the management. The Special District Social Welfare Officer cannot cancel the suspension under Rule 33 or 28(5) on the ground of lack of prior permission. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Special District Social Welfare Officer has the power to cancel an order of suspension passed by the management of a private school on the ground that prior permission was not obtained under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the communication dated 21.01.2009, and directed that the suspension order of respondent no.4 shall remain in force. The management is liable to pay subsistence allowance as per Rule 35(4) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981.
Law Points
- Suspension power of management under Rule 35 of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules
- 1981 is independent of prior approval
- failure to obtain prior approval only affects payment of subsistence allowance
- not validity of suspension
- Rule 33 and 28(5) do not empower authority to cancel suspension.
